zazen

@Elliott This comment:

@Elliott what do you think about Shahid Bolsens theory around this war - commented above replying to Jodi. As your from US? Do you think the state is captured to that degree where it’s the biggest money dictating its foreign policy ie the financial elites who want a stable investable Middle East - that this war is just a operational purge of hardliners in the way of that plan.

Why were they concerned about apartheid South Africa? SA isn’t Shia, Muslim or Arab. Theres also definitely a geopolitical angle ie wanting to have strategic depth against Israel who view Iran as the enemy, including its backer the US/West who has long vied Iran as such.

I think it’s all of the above but to varying degrees - with Jiang weighting ideology as a driver being the weakest, Israel’s influence being mid, US strategic dominance being the heaviest driver. Israel is a highly influential node in a larger US imperial system - it can nudge actions at the margins or set the pace or timing of events, but never control the empire to do the events in the first place. US-Israel interests converge in wanting regional domination. US for grand strategy / control of important choke point, dollar dominance, and an important trade corridor on the largest landmass on earth - Eurasia - which connects to its two rivals (China-Russia). Israel security and gulf stability to protect oil flows is also important as the global economy runs on it - including petro dollar. But much of the insecurity comes from zero sum thinking around how to go about security which is neoconesque - domination and submission of any defiant / autonomous actors. They want Iran to capitulate and it won’t because it has a history of dealing with Western imperialism it doesn’t want to repeat - and feels it has the cards not to ie its geographic WMD the strait of Hormuz which their using as we speak to impose costs on the empire. I’d guess it’s 50% US empire, 30% Israeli influence, 10% domestic politics (Trump / Bibi) , 5% ideaology (Christian Zionism / eschatology), 5% capital interests (MIC, big oil) Covers what you were asking too.

Unverified but also I think it’s state or institutionally managed wealth - not his personal wealth. Due to sanctions they have a whole parallel economy and black money moving around. A lot of the wealth is in Iran (IRGC controlled industries) or some outside in property perhaps - def a leap from Western propaganda that Iran wants to destroy the West in that sense. Im really conflicted on Bolsens take on Iran and have for a while taken his views with caution - I’ve honed in on his core blind spot which skews his analysis. It’s that the US state is totally captured by capital interest - thus any state action must have capitals hand behind it - leading to rationalise its actions around that fact. And amongst differing capital interest the most dominant faction is the Financial elite (FIC) financial-industrial-complex - that has eclipsed and outgrown the (MIC) - military industrial complex which was the old faction dictating foreign policy and profiting of wars. His logic is - that FIC want stability for investability - they profit more from stable (emerging - global south) markets. And because they are trans national (don’t care for their host nation from which they grew - US) they are partnering with the new centres of power ( GCC, China, BRICS ) who have the same vision of stability, prosperity etc. Trump is assumed to be amongst that “new money” faction of elites - also due to his close ties with the gulf countries and family business ties. So he’s on board with the vision and overseeing the dismantling of US empire so that multi polarity can emerge - that this FIC will profit from and who are invested in it. ** But now that war has kicked off - it needs to be rationalised. Hasn’t the US pivoted to the FIC’s plans and foreign policy which wants stability? This is where he reaches IMO and becomes conspiratorial simply because of that core blind spot (US total capture by capital). His theory is that insider pragmatists in Iran needed this war as a method to take out the hardliners in the way of reform/peace and stability. And that they are aligned on the vision but can’t come to peace due to these hardliners. As if going to war is the efficient method lol it literally creates more hardliners “rally around the flag effect”. As if the new leader Motjaba was an inside man on the job and feeling pragmatic enough to make a deal after sacrificing his whole family. I think the security state has its own logic, institutions and motives ie primacy of the US empire. Even if capital hollows out the nation state the empire state remains its own insulated domain that won’t be. I think the security state has its own logic, institutions and motives ie primacy of the US empire. Even if capital hollows out the nation state the empire state remains its own insulated domain that won’t be. Capital has penetrated the state but not totally captured it to the point it dictates every policy - it may influence sure - but ultimately the state has its own logic of strategic dominance. Hence why there is the national security strategy - talking of power, primacy and not just profit which Bolsen has totalised as the dominant logic and explanation behind all US behaviours. Notice how he applies realism (states competing for security, power) to the gulf countries behaviours in Africa (Sudan, Somalia etc) but doesn’t apply it to the US - because he assumes the state isn’t its own actor - because it’s captured by capital who wants stability for investability. All kinds of mental gymnastics need to happen to explain geopolitical events from that point on. Trump increasing military budget to 1.5trillion? That’s just for domestic policing and US’s own back yard - not the Middle East which is the future growth region the FIC are invested in lol US doing sanctions, tarrifs, China tech containment - hurting capital interests - but I thought capitals captured the state Mr.Bolsen? Nope - they just clamped down on Anthropic for not following orders / which OpenAI did. State is the final authority - because they have monopoly on force - no amount of finance can become sovereign over - even if they can invest beyond the nation state itself. It’s more simple (Occams razor) : Iran is being tackled now because it’s weakened+vulnerable, has been a long time target, Israel heavily influencing also for its own needs/wants, and multipolarity is challenging the US empire/dollar of which Iran trades outside of - but that Russia and China are too catastrophic to go to direct war with. Empire acting like empire during a phase it feels it’s losing its primacy in - trying to lock down any interests it can to reverse a trajectory it can’t - and miscalculating due to hubris typical of late stage empires - now stuck in a quagmire Iran is going to drag it through to change the balance of power in the region. **Side note: I think Sunni Muslims have a bias against Shia Iran - perhaps they can’t accept Iran is the defiant one with balls whilst their states are down or subordinate satellites - so they’d rather have the glory of US empire defeat leading to regional stability and prosperity via BRICS - be attributed to their own GCC elites and Western Financial elites in on the plan. What do you think? Is it plausible the state is captured to that extent.. I’m not sure but I highly doubt it.

Its so unfortunate - the region has been in chaos ever since Israel's occupation / US's domination of the petro dollar - with all the spillover affects its caused. PLO in the South, Israel coming in - Hezbollah filling in the vaccum - Iran bolstering them up as asymmetric deterrence to the point the can't be subordinate to the Lebanese state which is itself weak. The fact they can go into Syria and fight causing more chaos - and that protect the land bridge to Iran for supplies etc. It's all geopolitics and power competition. If Israel could be at peace with the region and the Palestinian question resolved - things would calm down a lot. Lebanaon could re-build and get stronger to sub-ordinate Hezbollah as it should be etc. That was great and in line with what I wrote a page back - comes down to corridors (trade) and currency (what that trade is settled in). I believe Israel heavily influenced things to tilt towards this being done also, after watching the following:

A plausible one though because it isn't complete. Genocide also by definition means the intent to kill in part or in whole - so even if 100% isn't achieved, doesn't not make it one. Otherwise there would never be a genocide unless that race/people/nation-attempt at becoming a nation is made extinct. https://www.timesofisrael.com/time-fact-checks-netanyahu-interview-countering-his-denial-of-bankrolling-hamas/ ''Netanyahu had reportedly said at a Likud faction meeting in 2019 that anyone who opposes a Palestinian state should support the funds for Hamas, the enemy of the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority. When Time asked about the quote, Netanyahu replied: “That’s a false statement. I never said that.” However, Time noted, besides the numerous reports of the 2019 comments, Netanyahu had reportedly said the same in a 2012 interview with journalist Dan Margalit. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also made the claim in a 2015 interview.'' So Putin's wise for seeking prosperity for his people - on terms he didn't have to subordinate his countries sovereignty - because they got nukes and are formidable. But Iran's barbaric because it doesn't want to subordinate its sovereignty either and has had a defiant posture against the West ever since against their own containment? Domestic rhetoric doesn't mean they're going to act on it - it's part of domestic politics and they want people to rally around the flag when threatened by a external power. But I agree its not strategically wise. It's the same way Medvedev tweets out threatening remarks that increase tensions for no reason or on tv shows / news anchors being hawkish. Regarding capability - the ayatollah they killed literally had a fatwa against nukes as a weapon. They signed up to the JCPOA that Trump ripped up. They were negotiating last year during which they got bombed. They were negotiating this year and went above and beyond the JCPOA that Trump could have taken and boasted about Peace in the Middle East like a retard - again they got hit DURING negotiations in which they were conceeding massively. Who's the one against peace then? And why do they keep flip flopping around? My thinking is that they don't really want full economic integration of Iran because that will lead to Iran being a dominant player in the region - so they use the nuclear card and negotiations as a carrot push-pulling - to keep it strategically constrained - then gaslight the world about it being a threat. Same way US doesn't want India to rise in a way that threatens its hegemony, and the way China has risen within their same order and is now threatening their dominance - Iran is even more important to prevent because of Israel being near by. Talks now of Israel thinking about Turkey next: Israel seeks security by dominating the region and fracturing it, by which it will never find security. Knawledge:

@Breakingthewall So it doesn't get lost in the comments.

*I didn't call him nazi but am chiming in on the convo between breaking wall and other user*lol We don't know the facts - that's the problem. Any when a country is being attempted to be regime changed through internal instigation which apparently had provocatuers killing state personal (police etc), had Trump and others openly tweeting to storm government buildings, had Israeli / Western heads brag about having Mossad on the ground doing all that - you don't think the state is going to fight back? If the same was happening in the West what would happen? Spain crackde down on Catalonian succession - not in a very bloody way obviously, but there was no superpower provoking Catalonians on the ground that would escalate to such violence either. You underestimate the beast of imperialism that countries on the receiving end of it are faced with. If the Iranian government are bad like the West says and the people there are suffering under them - why do they sanction and hurt the every day people which the EUU is also claimed support for like the little butch puppets they are. Why is Cuba being embargoed which is getting very little coverage. It's not about you or me who live in the core of the Empire, its that the violence goes one way which is outside to those resisting it and being affected by it ie bombed, couped, killed, sanctioned economically into desperate conditions which only the West has the ability to uni-laterally do. Its their financial WMD.

Is Iran trying to create a global empire/order under which it wants the world to live? No, so don't panic. Does opposing imperialism against countries mean you endorse the countries being predated on? Also no. I've shared the bad of Iran - imam of peace/PBD podcast where he goes into it. You understand Western imperialism against Russia being bad, but when it comes to Iran its good because of your anti-Islam bias. You know that saying ''hard times creates hard men, that create good time that create soft men'' - in the same way hard times creates hard liners too. Those hard times come heavily from external geopolitical pressures such as - being historically couped and strategically contained ever since. I'll relate above answer to this. A countries geopolitics is downstream of the cards its dealt - the geo in geopolitics is for geography - the real material world that then informs the countries structural stregnths and weakness. Trade alone shows nothing, its on what terms that trade is done - what do you need to give up in order to be able to be part of the Western system ie how much autonomy or soverignty. The gulf countries being weak and small, feeling vulnerable in the region made the deal from THEIR position, to be under US security architecture in exchange for trading their oil in dollars - petro dollar. But we can now see what having bases in your country does - sucks you into the geopolitics of the super power patron - at your own expense and discontent. Now the gulf is suffering and stuck in a quagmire it hopes is resolved. Now - China occupies a different position and simply due to its sheer size and scale has leverage against the empire imposing itself. It trades with the US - but on terms that don't give away its autonomy or sovereignty to a massive degree. In the same way - Iran views its on cards and questions why they should subordinate on unfavorable terms. It could be a formidable power given its size, population, education levels (reasonably high especially in STEM), deep culture / civilization - and most of all its geography / resources. Its those same reasons why it resists containment, and why its contained. The issue with integrating economically is that it can then create rivals in the system. The US learnt will try prevent that with India as we can see spoken candidly here:

In short Western empire, of which it’s a forward base. The same reason Japanese imperialism should have been hated in the past, or Soviet, or Hitlers imperialism. Iran is a threat to that empire because it’s in a vital geography and openly defiant to bending the knee. And has the cards to do so - to a extent. I said there wouldn’t be regime change when those protests kicked off, and that this war wouldn’t be a easy one for the US - it isn’t. Their like a porcupine fighting a lion, all they have to do is not lose and impose significant costs via economic/political pressure. If we understand the core of what underpins empire then many actions become clear. Basically it’s down to trade corridors and settling that trade in the empires currency. Venezuela and Iran are both settling trade in non-dollar, but Iran is arguably the much more vital trade corridor (Hormuz) and connecting the largest land mass on earth which can by pass it. They are juniors co-building a parallel financial system BRICS. But the US can’t directly war with China/Russia (dragonbear) - so it goes for the weak links and attempts indirect containment to maintain primacy. Israel has its own security concerns too - so US/Israel align on dominating the region for slightly different reasons. Israel’s security dilemma is largely self inflicted due to dominating Palestinians and fracturing the region alongside the US. They deserve to be hated (not the people, but the empire). Fuck them.

Goyim lives matter

But are all those true? I’ve seen plenty of videos of their region where life is normal and they practice Islam, have beautiful mosques too. They had a program of those campuses (repressive and inhumane yes) to de-radicalise after terrorist attacks apparently occurred. Many of them for example go back and forth via land routes into neighbouring Afghanistan and end up in Syria too with other terrorist groups fighting jihad etc So the same extremist strand of Islam you point out is what China had to deal with in its own borders. Secessionists. Hence the camping down. Now it’s ended and Muslims live as normal there - from what I gather. China’s invested in the region to provide economic support and help de-radicalise or keep them away from terrorism and tourism’s massively increased. How did US deal with terrorists? Fuck up an entire continent 0-100 real quick. No understanding of the root cause of the issue. Muslims themselves know the issue of extremists within their own religion - Muslim states support or do counter terrorism ops all the time especially for example Pakistan in collaboration with US etc. They know the issue and perhaps get what Chinas dealing and how it felt the need to do what it did to maintain national integrity. Perhaps that was being exploited by covert cia ops that arm them to destabilise from within too. Most Muslim countries have good relations with China - get the nature of the beast - and also don’t have the geopolitical luxury of calling them out on the world stage - but also don’t feel the need to make a performance of it and morally posture. Iran had a anti-apartheid position and politically supported the fight against it (a non Muslim country) beside just Palestine.

Think your right - this might be their only chance to degrade US presence in the region so their going for it. Trump thought it would be a quick one and probably didn’t expect them to start hitting the gulf etc. They literally said they would. Now he’s in a quagmire looking for off ramp to save face. Also - a lot of his rhetoric is to manipulate the market / oil prices to maintain stability in the system - obviously insider trading is a given lol If it’s the end of the war then why the Airborne division or another carrier being sent.. Seems they want to end it but are preparing for all eventualities and Iran is like “no you don’t, I got you on the ropes, no I’m gonna throw some combos so I never feel threatened by you again” ie destroy the bases / radars / cause a wedge between the gulf and US/Israel - they’re angry for being dragged into the war by US/Israel. I was meant to be flying to Dubai next week but postponed lol

Iran’s water desalination plant and civilian energy infrastructure was hit yesterday’ - oil depot up in flames. This morning Bahrain’s desalination plant was hit. Who’s upping the escalation ladder? Comment from X ” The children breathing this air today will develop cancers 10, 20, 30 years from now. And nobody will connect it. Nobody will pay for their treatment. Nobody will be held accountable. When petroleum burns, it releases sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and toxic hydrocarbons into the air. When those chemicals mix with rain, they become SULFURIC ACID and NITRIC ACID. The rain causes "chemical burns to the skin and serious damage to the lungs." it's a chemical attack using oil as the weapon When Saddam burned oil wells in Kuwait in 1991, US veterans developed “Gulf War Syndrome” chronic pain, neurological damage, cancer. 30 years later, they're still dying from it. That was in the desert. This is inside a city of 10 million.”

Check this: https://x.com/brianjberletic/status/2029494771585372603?s=46&t=DuLUbFRQFGpB8oo7PwRglQ “ 🇺🇸🇮🇱The US is not Fighting Iran "For Israel" Western empire going back to Roman times sought control of the Middle East in pursuit of greater primacy. The British Empire sought control over the region in pursuit of GLOBAL primacy - and the US has simply picked up where the British left off. The US seeks primacy over the ENTIRE planet - the Middle East is part of the planet - thus the US seeks primacy over the Middle East as well as the Western Hemisphere, Europe, Africa, and Asia. Israel was a joint US-British creation as a means of facilitating this regional control just as both nations have created proxies around the globe throughout history up to and including now with nations like Ukraine, the island province of Taiwan, etc. The US seeks control over the Middle East to control its oil - specifically to deny it to China. This is a stated objective spanning years of policy papers. It also seeks to topple Iran as a member of the multipolar world as a means of whittling it down. If/When the US topples Iran it will then pivot to further encircling Russia and China. ALL of these conflicts are connected - including through the US strategy of using regional proxies to advance its interests. In Europe it is Ukraine, in the Middle East is it Israel, Jordan, and the Persian Gulf states, in Asia-Pacific it is the island province of Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines. For those citing munition shortages and other symptoms of US imperial overreach during this current conflict as "proof" it is suffering instead at the expense of "Israel" - munition shortages and energy crises began with the US proxy war in Ukraine years earlier. Some other facts: AIPAC spending is dwarfed by US arms manufacturing lobbying alone saying nothing of big-oil, big-pharma, big-tech etc.; Israel is entirely dependent on US arms, munitions, joint military industrial production, air and missile defenses, ISR, and both political and financial support - support that Israel would blow away in the wind without; Last year the US literally used Israel to trigger its war on Iran to absorb the blame and retaliation in full from the resulting conflict - as per US policy papers proposing doing so as early as 2009; This year Israel again absorbs the brunt of the retaliation - and thanks to useful idiots - sole blame for the conflict instead of Wall Street and Washington; IMPORTANT: Pointing this out does not somehow "defend Israel" or negate Israel's crimes any more than Ukraine being a US proxy negates its many and multiplying crimes. The US and its proxies are all guilty. It is important to hold EVERYONE involved in injustice accountable. It is most important to deal with a global threat at its root and that root lies in Wall Street and Washington - not an artificially created country completely dependent on both.” ”It would really be like saying: “Ukraine controls the US! Look at how the US is running out of missiles to fight for Ukraine! Look at how many Ukrainians come to Washington! Zelensky spoke to Congress!!!" The US is backing Ukraine to cripple Russia the same way it backs Israel to cripple targeted nations in the Middle East the same way it is building up proxies in Asia-Pacific to target China. Separate your personal hate and emotions and see the big picture.” * I’ve commented views similar to this weeks ago.

I remembered this thread asking about what is feminine / masculine etc. This tweet was interesting in that regard: https://x.com/sovereignim/status/2028892302207230415?s=46&t=DuLUbFRQFGpB8oo7PwRglQ “In man, she loves the masculine: risk taking, daring, conquest driven, ruthless, dominant, defiant, assertive - she loves the monster But crucially too, she looks for the human in that monster, the beast that would be divine, and for that she looks for the feminine in him: intuition, receptivity, attunement, expressiveness, sympathy, sensitivity and nuturing The former of course being more masculine than the latter, but the synthesis of each being perfectly masculine in a way that makes the former alone look primitive - for you see, to woman, the "true man" is a man who has integrated his feminine without losing his masculine - and in that sense, has transcended his primitive barbarianism to resemble god in his paternalism - fatherliness is apex masculinity, and the perfect father is God, but within man: the synergised synthesis of masculine and feminine within the male vessel. It is for this reason she loves a man who knows how to appreciate her without being consumed by her or sycophantic to her, because he embodies the best of her without losing the best of himself. To simply prefer the feminine to the masculine is to self-betray, to surrender, to lose all respect and get nothing. To understand the feminine in all its darkness, appreciate its light, and incorporate that into yourself as a man whilst retaining your masculine edge is something else entirely. In truth, most women are forced into unsatisfying mate choices: be it the sensitive attuned man who lacks ruthlessness, the cerebral man who lacks courage or sensitivity, or the ruthless man who lacks wisdom. Forced to pick a single lane, the ruthless will win everytime, but of course the best of men does not inhabit just one lane, but all. But if she is greedy, and she is, for as the receptive principle she is endlessly devouring - then she longs for it all - she longs for man as both savagery and poetry - the paradox who has integrated contradictions in tension to resemble art - a man with the voltage to be as chaotic and thrilling as she is, whilst being reasonable and grounded enough to stabilise her. A man who can take her to the highest heights she's ever known, and then catch her as she falls without flinching - he is both adventurer and leader. Very few women ever get to know such a man, for to be such a man is to, irrespective of all other factors, be the best of men. Which is why if you are a man who wants your pick of only the finest daughters, then becoming this man will grant you your wish.”

@Lyubov Thats a great way to put it and makes total sense. He just uploaded a new vid updating on the war:

But that imo is where things go too far and become dystopic. Essentially “people aren’t allowed to leave because they might be influenced.” A stable system doesn’t need to trap its population to that degree though, China doesn’t for example. It’s the other end of the spectrum and totalised control. Another thing they have is yeon-jwa-je which is generational punishment or guilt by association. Totally fucked for a family to be punished for sometimes thee generations for the crime of one member.

@Cred lol bro - Western propaganda existing doesn’t mean not being objective on how life in NK is. Unless I’ve been propagandised and am misinformed on those conditions - that’s another thing all together. Are North Koreans even allowed to leave their country?

But the problem is that NK has used that to create dystopic conditions, whilst China hasn’t. Even then, Westerners still view China as being dystopic because they glaze “freedom” and have a childish view of it.

@Ajay0 What about India signing up with US in a deal that agreed to not buy Russian energy? Is that still valid? Seems India has made it choice of who to align with - I said a year ago that the weak link in BRICS would be India as a swing state choosing a side rather than simply maintaining neutrality. And now with Iran: Just saw Jaishabkar’s tweet regarding the naval incident: https://x.com/drsjaishankar/status/2029522979026256168?s=46&t=DuLUbFRQFGpB8oo7PwRglQ “Had a telecon with Iranian FM Seyed Abbas Araghchi this afternoon. @araghchi” No condemnation, only cold language. Cowardly and lacking political courage we were praising earlier in this thread. India should have good relation in the very geographic region it’s in - which it can and will never escape - rather than bend the knee to a aspire all the way over in the Atlantic that suffers little consequence for its imperial adventurism and instead externalises it to its vassals.

Stay safe - I have family in the North too Nazareth side. Hopefully this comes to a end and with little suffering.

@Cred on point. The coalition of the compromised ie Epstein Class - use it as a tool of empire. Moral language is laundered for geopolitical power games. Even spiral dynamics itself is misused to cement the notion of Western supremacy - claiming not only moral but spiritual development.

@LordFall nice share. I think Jiang is predicting worst case outcomes - desalination plant is a major red line. Tbh this could spiral in multiple ways - a Kurdish insurgency is being armed and backed to do the regime change as we speak - probably as a alternative to boots on the ground which is simply catastrophic and which there’s little political will for. This is problematic for Turkey as it could force them to intervene and stabilise their side the border. It seems like if regime change isn’t achievable then regime implosion, chaos and balkanisation is the next best outcome - without care for the spillover affects of such a thing. Looks like carpet bombing or “mowing the lawn” the same term they use in operations in Gaza as Sky News just commented on also: Legend How prescient was Khameini - look at what he says half way through the following about trusting the West and negotiations and note how old the video is: