This week, Survival Sunday is focused on the looming threat of armed conflict as international laws and agreements are on shaky ground around the world. Much is awry in Europe and Asia, and while it would be nice to say “Oh, that’s not our problem,” what happens there will most certainly affect the United States. I’m not suggesting interventionism – only an awareness that we absolutely MUST get prepared for the disaster that could await us should major European financial institutions collapse or “regional” nuclear conflict occur. Today, we’ll talk about how these things will directly affect the United States.
Thing Are Really Going Sideways in Germany
Angela Merkel has felt the unforgiving backlash from the people in regional elections across the country as Berlin saw yet more gains for the AfD. Her stance on mass migration has seen citizens move away from her party, Christian Democrats, and move towards the AfD – Alternative for Germany, generally considered to be a far-right party. For the first time ever, the party has exceeded the 5% of votes required to enter the State Assembly.
Over a million refugees entered Germany during the last 12 months and integration is proving to be a problem with even the mainstream media referring to Berlin as a ‘failed state‘.
The New York Times reports:
“The success of the Alternative for Germany is a wake-up call that it can’t be taken for granted that society is liberal and will remain so,” Heribert Prantl, a journalist at the newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, wrote in a commentary. “Nor can it be taken for granted that minorities (and not only the refugees) are and will be respected.”
Berlin is the 10th state in which the party has earned representation, and with little more than a year to go before the 2017 general election, the party appears to be gaining enough strength to earn seats in the national Parliament. Some commentators viewed the result as a chance for a rebirth of Germany’s struggling traditional parties and its overall democracy.
It’s becoming clear why Germans were warned a couple of weeks ago to start stockpiling food and water against as a hedge against a ‘national emergency’ that may occur in the future. The warning was issued as Germans prepared to go to the polls in regional elections. With the staunch anti-immigration feelings of the populace bubbling over Merkel saw the writing on the wall – she knows there’s trouble ahead. Germany is also considering re-introducing the draft to make sure they have enough military personnel to deal with the problems that look set to occur if high levels of migration continue. All of this comes hot on the heels of calls for the formation of a European Army, something endorsed by EU president Jean-Claude Juncker.
But it isn’t just the anti-immigration sentiment Germany needs to worry about. Deutsche Bank is going under and Angela Merkel has already said that the largest bank in the country will not be bailed out. And the economic news gets worse: Commerzbank, the nation’s second-largest bank, will be no longer be paying shareholder dividends and is in the process of cutting more than 10,000 jobs.
Europe is preparing itself for a war that will affect the whole European Union regardless of where it starts. If more than two dozen countries are involved, then the chances of it going intercontinental increases exponentially. We can’t rule out that the United States would become involved, which of course would inflame Russia. China is already ticked off about the installation of the THADD missile system in South Korea, and then that crazy little despot in North Korea has been playing with his nuclear weapons…should I go on?
Do you remember what happened the last time the far right took over the political scene in Germany?
Over 60 million people were killed, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million. (source)
60 million people…and that was without the high-tech, remote-kill weaponry that now exists, weapons that would have been the stuff of science fiction in 1939-1945. Let’s hope that the powers that be think about that and step back before it’s too late.
The Media Pounces on a Deceptive Reason to Demonize Homeschoolers
I know, that’s an astounding headline, right? The media, that bastion of truth, is perverting the truth to promote an agenda. How very unlike them. You’ll be stunned that they are promoting the misconception that homeschooled children as poorly socialized misfits who are on the brink of violence.
The media and the government are not fond of kids who live “outside the system.” At every opportunity, they like to point out the downsides of homeschooling, ignoring the fact that homeschooled kids tend to be very successful (and independent) later in life. (We can’t have all of these non-brainwashed, independent thinkers around, right?)
Despite the violence that takes place in schools across America, despite the metal detectors that kids must pass through to get into the buildings in some places, despite the bullying and the peer pressure, somehow when a homeschooled kid does something bad, it’s because they’ve been educated outside the system.
In fact, the kid doesn’t even have to be a typical homeschooler to be used to paint the entire 2-million-plus-strong homeschool movement with a brush of dysfunction by the media.
Take, for example, the recent case in South Carolina, when a boy went on a shooting rampage that left his father dead and injured two students and a teacher at a local elementary school.
“The South Carolina School shooter, who was homeschooled ….”
But what they didn’t say is that he had actually been expelled from the public school – he wasn’t a kid who was lovingly being educated at home by choice. This article explains his troubled past and the terrifying reason he got kicked out of school.
But, you know, it far better serves the agenda to say he went off the deep end because he was home-schooled.
If India and Pakistan Nuke Each Other, the Disastrous Aftermath Won’t Just Be “Regional”
While all eyes are on the Obama and Putin peeing contest over Syria, the ongoing and escalating tensions between India and Pakistan seem to be on the back burner as far as mainstream media is concerned.
The sabre-rattling is increasing and this is more important to us, in the US (and the whole planet) than people might think.
Why? Well, both countries have a decent sized nuclear arsenal at their disposal and they’re not afraid to use them.
Here’s a quick overview of the problem, which has been ongoing for decades:
- The Kashmir dispute dates from 1947. The partition of the Indian subcontinent along religious lines led to the formation of India and Pakistan. However, there remained the problem of over 650 states, run by princes, existing within the two newly independent countries.
- Because of its location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his subjects were Muslim. Unable to decide which nation Kashmir should join, Hari Singh chose to remain neutral.
- His hopes of remaining independent were dashed in October 1947, as Pakistan sent in Muslim tribesmen who were knocking at the gates of the capital Srinagar.
- Hari Singh appealed to the Indian government for military assistance and fled to India. He signed the Instrument of Accession, ceding Kashmir to India on October 26.
- Two more wars were fought, in 1965 and 1971. Kashmir effectively became the border between the countries with 65% of it in Indian territory and the 35% in Pakistan.
You can learn more of the details about the conflict here. Border skirmishes have continued but of late, an increase in the number of military deaths has raised the tensions to new levels.
But most alarmingly, Pakistan has actually outright said they will use nuclear weapons to annihilate India.
So, why does all this matter? Well, both countries have nuclear capabilities – and both have proven they have long memories and short fuses…no pun intended.
The effects of a limited nuclear war between two countries so far away may not seem as worrisome as the current rhetoric that Obama and Putin are engaged in, but there is a good deal to be concerned about – and it’s not just a bit extra radiation floating around.
Obviously, there would be deaths on a massive scale on both sides of the border, with massively overpopulated cities most likely being the main targets for both sides tens of millions is not and over the top estimate depending on the number of missiles fired.
But it’s the indirect results that will cause a long-term, horrifying global disaster.
The global costs of a limited nuclear exchange would make 20 or 30 million dead seem pretty small if you look at the indirect results.
Here’s the abstract of a report called “Multidecadal global cooling and unprecedented ozone loss following a regional nuclear conflict.” The report, which has not been widely publicised, (shocking, right?) paints an incredibly bleak picture of what life would be like after a “regional” nuclear conflict.
The main points:
- A limited, regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan in which each side detonates fifty 15 kt weapons could produce about 5 Tg of black carbon (BC).
- This would self-loft to the stratosphere, where it would spread globally, producing a sudden drop in surface temperatures and intense heating of the stratosphere.
- Using the Community Earth System Model with the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model, we calculate an e-folding time of 8.7 years for stratospheric BC compared to 4–6.5 years for previous studies.
- Our calculations show that global ozone losses of 20%–50% over populated areas, levels unprecedented in human history, would accompany the coldest average surface temperatures in the last 1000 years.
- We calculate summer enhancements in UV indices of 30%–80% over midlatitudes, suggesting widespread damage to human health, agriculture, and terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
- Killing frosts would reduce growing seasons by 10–40 days per year for 5 years.
- Surface temperatures would be reduced for more than 25 years due to thermal inertia and albedo effects in the ocean and expanded sea ice.
- The combined cooling and enhanced UV would put significant pressures on global food supplies and could trigger a global nuclear famine.
A regional nuclear conflict is not as limited or as regional as it first appears, is it?
Please get prepared.
I really feel that we are facing some very difficult times. If the insanity of this election isn’t enough to convince you to prepare, please read the links above so you can see how greatly our country is threatened by the possibility of a financial collapse in Europe as well as the rising tensions and impending armed conflict.