US > Iran conflict begins

Misty said:
Oh lord, not Macaroni...

These guys, him included - also Rutte, our former PM - ( Klaus Schwab's right hand man ) are up to no good but the good of the elites. When everyone stops taking anything these straight up evil villains say -ESPECIALLY at the WEF meetings in Davos seriously we will be much better of. No saying rings truer at the WEF meetings, than "all the world's a stage".. or hail Satan- which ever is more publicly palatable.

These guys don't want to make the world a better place. Not in Europe, and not in the States. They want to make dutiful supplicants of us. They want a one world order, a totalitarian dictatorship in which we do as they say and they bring about blotting out the sun, changing the weather, and making us dine on crickets.

They are the cartoon equivalent of Pinky and the Brain.
Click to expand...
Finally, someone who pierces the veil of Maya.

-Giammarco
 
QuickTwist said:
Some of them are human extinctionists. It literally does not get lower than that.
Click to expand...
the answer is simple:

If zero expresses a function, zero will be the result of that function. It is pure logic, don't worry. The world is a chariot and money is its wheels. There is no interest for anyone in mutual annihilation.

Even the so-called Black Swan,the unpredictable event that shatters fragile systems,is merely a stress test for those who operate on the bedrock of reality. For the 'sophisticated' elite, a Black Swan is a catastrophe; for those who understand the mechanics of power and the indisputable nature of data, it is just an outlier that the system eventually reabsorbs to restore its equilibrium.

Self-assurance derives from the knowledge of data that corresponds to reality, not from the fear of the improbable.

They are playing with the perception of data lol


-Giammarco
 
 
Akar said:
Self-assurance derives from the knowledge of data that corresponds to reality, not from the fear of the improbable.
Click to expand...
There exists so many differences in the billions of people in the world, along with so many views of reality (and possibly more than one reality to a single individual). Many people will be fortunate to have self-assurance at all. Not everyone shares fear at the table with others. Interesting concepts, though, to further think about.
 
✅️ Send "hundreds" of US boots on the ground
- without letting mainstream media (msm) report the send offs as a valiant thingamajig
- msm reports the rescue as heroic blurring the fact that they did try to send jets over Iranian air space
- while firing top level military officials

✅️ Iran recruits millions of Basij volunteers
- allegedly including 12 year old children
- the problem is the word "volunteer" because if they are not being coerced, then the existentialism is deep
- accordingly, they asked for a million, 13m showed up. Yet another indicator that the existentialism also runs deep

Two types of powers; makes one wonder which one is more fascist.
 
QuickTwist said:
Some of them are human extinctionists. It literally does not get lower than that.
Click to expand...
There are theorists that posit that the "eaters's" push for ai is to eliminate human labor, hence maxing out profits. Makes one wonder what will happen to the rest of us when there are no jobs.

Part of me sometimes wants Iran to bomb the data centers so we can at least set back the a.i. progression, but nope. Even if they did, these eaters will for sure keep building more at the expense of converting farmland and eliminating jobs.


Also, i like Diary of a CEO (DOAC):
Link to the whole episode is in the description. There he details how Iran is framing this as a war against the Epstein class. He also states how Trump is a narcissist that is being fed propaganda.

If he is right, then it is the likes of Jared Kushner that are making the decisions, especially if he knows exactly how to manipulate Trump.



Keen is not the only academic that is repeating the same analysis. US trained academics who are ace in their fields, namely John Mearsheimer, Jeffrey Sachs, Richard Wolff to begin with have similar views. Their variations are very thin and nuanced, some more on power, flows, or capitalism critiques but their structural analyses align up. Trita Parsi is also saying similar things.
 
Last edited:
mintoots said:
Keen is not the only academic that is repeating the same analysis. US trained academics who are ace in their fields, namely John Mearsheimer, Jeffrey Sachs, Richard Wolff to begin with have similar views. Their variations are very thin and nuanced, some more on power, flows, or capitalism critiques but their structural analyses align up. Trita Parsi is also saying similar things.
Click to expand...

So? Do you think that high profile academics make the most accurate predictions? I read a book a while back (think it was Geopolitical Alpha by Marko Papic), concluding (with data) that the more high profile public appearances an analyst makes, the less accurate their predictions. They might be good at their job, but at this point these people are in entertainment business to provide the most broad strokes, zoomed out, sensationalist analysis. Peter Zeihan is another in this camp.

In my experience over the last few years, the best analysis usually comes from small to medium size finance professionals that run a small team substack blogs (behind paywall). Even for geopolitical events I would go with them over high profile academics or political scientists. I am thinking someone like Doomberg or Citrini Research in case you are wondering.

Like I wrote above, sounding confident is not necessarily a sign that an individual is correct.
 
Last edited:
philostam said:
So? Do you think that high profile academics make the most accurate predictions? I read a book a while back (think it was Geopolitical Alpha by Marko Papic), concluding (with data) that the more high profile public appearances an analyst makes, the less accurate their predictions. They might be good at their job, but at this point these people are in entertainment business to provide the most broad strokes, zoomed out, sensationalist analysis. Peter Zeihan is another in this camp.

In my experience over the last few years, the best analysis usually comes from small to medium size finance professionals that run a small team substack blogs (behind paywall). Even for geopolitical events I would go with them over high profile academics or political scientists. I am thinking someone like Doomberg or Citrini Research in case you are wondering.

Like I wrote above, sounding confident is not necessarily a sign that an individual is correct.
Click to expand...
We can only wait and see, and if still able, to recall what has been said over time.

I can also pull a quote about denial, but I won't. At very volatile times, dismissing big picture thinkers solely for their confidence becomes more dangerous ---it speaks og stubborness rather than a genuine desire for understanding, particularly because much of what these academics have written decades ago have in fact come to relevance. I am very familiar with academic arrogance, for sure, and there is nothing wrong with pulling in microscale analysts, of course ----scale matters to all of this. But what microscale financial analysts do not read as much as these academics do are exactly the broad strokes of history. Thinkers like Ray Dalio for example gets a lot of flack for zooming out so much, but his broad strokes do make sense.
 
Last edited:
mintoots said:
We can only wait and see, and if still able, to recall what has been said over time.

I can also pull a quote about denial, but I won't. At very volatile times, dismissing big picture thinkers solely for their confidence becomes more dangerous ---it speaks og stubborness rather than a genuine desire for understanding, particularly because much of what these academics have written decades ago have in fact come to relevance. I am very familiar with academic arrogance, for sure, and there is nothing wrong with pulling in microscale analysts, of course ----scale matters to all of this. But what microscale financial analysts do not read as much as these academics do are exactly the broad strokes of history. Thinkers like Ray Dalio for example gets a lot of flack for zooming out so much, but his broad strokes do make sense.
Click to expand...

Ray Dalio is pretty good, yeah (and his results testify to that). I learned a lot from him. John Mearsheimer, that you mentioned above, was also spot on on Ukraine - Russia for a long time. I do see your point - probably on the brink of WW1 I would also say that cooler heads will prevail and nothing will happen. :) Sometimes things do escalate, but 99% of the time they do not. Even for Ukraine - Russia where it did escalate more than I thought, no one really cares 4 years on. It is, of course, a human tragedy in that part of the world (and I do have Ukrainain refugee collegues so I know their stories) but it does not affect rest of the world that much beyond the re-militarization of Europe.

To be blunt, all that matters here is strait of Hormuz. The conflict between Israel and Iran will continue regardless but my basecase opinion is that the spice must (and will) flow trough it soon.

Zooming out, it's hard to argue that we are in sort of "fourth turning" moment but it takes longer than some imagine and it doesn't need to lead to famine or WW3. I think this fourth turning will be more subtle (financial restructuring, financial repression, erosion of purchasing power...all that it's already happening...you add AI to the mix and we can just pray). The tails of the distribution of probable outcomes are certainly fat, so the good old mean-reversion model might not work this time.
 
philostam said:
but it takes longer than some imagine and it doesn't need to lead to famine or WW3. I think this fourth turning will be more subtle (financial restructuring, financial repression, erosion of purchasing power...all that it's already happening...you add AI to the mix and we can just pray).
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is also my hope, but you're right. What AI is bringing in is driving me completely out of my mind. I remember arguing with @Rit4lin about the potential sentience of AI and I argued how the chaos of humanity is far too different from the boolean logic, therefore this imagined eater utopia with only bots in the matrix while we're hooked to pods is possiby centuries forward but it is increasingly starting to feel like it's just across the horizon. I'm thinking Rit is right on this AI superintelligence becoming sentient and I'm probably wrong.

It won't be a perfect transitition, but I am sensing AI is coming so fast. What I particularly liked about Keen's analysis in that episode though is his foregrounding of the biosphere as a key player and game changer in all this. People like to imagine the productivity from these bots and data centers while disregarding whether or not there is enough water or copper or soil for these systems. Many AI enthusiasts like to argue that when AI reaches superintelligence, none of that will matter because then AI will be able to produce matter out of thin air, but I am very hesitant. Even if we are able to harness energies that won't harm the biosphere, we don't really understand the aftereffects.

We could be hitting a dinosaur/ Easter-Island extinction level here if AI goes on unchecked or the AI genuises are perfectly right and then our human specie becomes more obsolete over time.
 
Human lifespan limits return-on-investment timetables such that an AI bubble is a very real possibility, if quarterlies of the major players are to be believed.

To say nothing of the groundswell opposition.

Cheers,
Ian
 
mintoots said:
Yeah, that is also my hope, but you're right. What AI is bringing in is driving me completely out of my mind. I remember arguing with @Rit4lin about the potential sentience of AI and I argued how the chaos of humanity is far too different from the boolean logic, therefore this imagined eater utopia with only bots in the matrix while we're hooked to pods is possiby centuries forward but it is increasingly starting to feel like it's just across the horizon. I'm thinking Rit is right on this AI superintelligence becoming sentient and I'm probably wrong.

It won't be a perfect transitition, but I am sensing AI is coming so fast. What I particularly liked about Keen's analysis in that episode though is his foregrounding of the biosphere as a key player and game changer in all this. People like to imagine the productivity from these bots and data centers while disregarding whether or not there is enough water or copper or soil for these systems. Many AI enthusiasts like to argue that when AI reaches superintelligence, none of that will matter because then AI will be able to produce matter out of thin air, but I am very hesitant. Even if we are able to harness energies that won't harm the biosphere, we don't really understand the aftereffects.

We could be hitting a dinosaur/ Easter-Island extinction level here if AI goes on unchecked or the AI genuises are perfectly right and then our human specie becomes more obsolete over time.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I'm also a luddite when it comes to AI. I hate it, think it's retarded, and hate the vision of the world that AI accelerationists are pushing. I understand it from the business-owner perspective, but a lot if is just opportunism (the corporate world needed a new narrative to boost their earnings growth potential by over-promising something) and fear of being left behind. Ultimatelly, though, I don't think it can be just showed down our throats. I believe in the political power of the people and "median voter theory". I am happy to see some backlash against it building. Perhaps contrarty to most, I also don't think all rich business-owners are evil and greedy and inhumane - and most importantly, not all that powerful that we give them "credit" for. Ultimatelly, they need to create some sort of economic value to society, and they won't to it by replacing all the people (which are also their clients/customers). Plus, governments will have a say - I don't think they will want to see their income tax numbers drop off a cliff if the AI "predictions" of labor displacement are correct. Things are complicated, but national debt and bond market volatility are actually a build-in defence against AI going too fast. AI doesn't break economic and financial laws/constraints.
 
philostam said:
I don't disagree. I'm also a luddite when it comes to AI. I hate it, think it's retarded, and hate the vision of the world that AI accelerationists are pushing. I understand it from the business-owner perspective, but a lot if is just opportunism (the corporate world needed a new narrative to boost their earnings growth potential by over-promising something) and fear of being left behind. Ultimatelly, though, I don't think it can be just showed down our throats. I believe in the political power of the people and "median voter theory". I am happy to see some backlash against it building. Perhaps contrarty to most, I also don't think all rich business-owners are evil and greedy and inhumane - and most importantly, not all that powerful that we give them "credit" for. Ultimatelly, they need to create some sort of economic value to society, and they won't to it by replacing all the people (which are also their clients/customers). Plus, governments will have a say - I don't think they will want to see their income tax numbers drop off a cliff if the AI "predictions" of labor displacement are correct. Things are complicated, but national debt and bond market volatility are actually a build-in defence against AI going too fast. AI doesn't break economic and financial laws/constraints.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It is very important for governments that are truly for the people to push back now but that is not happening.
 
BREAKING: An Iranian source tells Qatar's Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that Iran is leaning toward accepting a two-week ceasefire "out of respect for the Pakistani mediator...and in order to give diplomacy an additional chance."

CNN is also reporting that a regional source says that a deal between the US and Iran is expected to be closed tonight. The regional source said “some good news is expected from both sides soon” and that discussions were steered directly by Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir.

Let's watch and hope this is true!
 
philostam said:
BREAKING: An Iranian source tells Qatar's Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that Iran is leaning toward accepting a two-week ceasefire "out of respect for the Pakistani mediator...and in order to give diplomacy an additional chance."

CNN is also reporting that a regional source says that a deal between the US and Iran is expected to be closed tonight. The regional source said “some good news is expected from both sides soon” and that discussions were steered directly by Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir.

Let's watch and hope this is true!
Click to expand...
I'm a bit stressed by the "wipe out an entire civilization by 8pm" rhetoric. I also just saw this:

US-Israeli strikes hit Iran's largest aluminum plant, petrochemical complex

The US and Israel attacked the Iran Aluminium Company (IRALCO) in Arak, the country's largest aluminum producer, as well as the Amirkabir Petrochemical Complex in Mahshahr, Iranian media reported. No casualties were reported in the strikes.
en.yenisafak.com en.yenisafak.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top