Showing posts with label World Order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World Order. Show all posts

Monday, May 20, 2024

Iran’s President and Foreign Minister die in Helicopter Crash | No Accident?

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian have died in a helicopter crash. 
 
Major strategic mistake of cramming the top government circle 
on the same copter for a visit to a very dodgy border. No 'accident'?

A total of nine people, including a provincial governor, were on board when the aircraft went down in northern Iran’s East Azerbaijan province. They all are believed to be dead. 
 
 
» Iran's retaliation against the Zionist regime ensures no aggression goes unanswered. «
President Ebrahim Raisi - April 19, 2024.
 
As the country mourns, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says there will be no disruptions to how Iran is run. Iran’s vice president will assume the powers of the presidency and new elections will be held within 50 days. Countries across the region express solidarity with Iran.
 
IDF troops took a break from murdering children in Gaza to
dance upon hearing news of Raisi's copter crash
Tel Aviv's media published this video showing them as they gloat and cheer on top of the land they stole. 
Were they dancing because they were just happy someone died? Or, might they have had a hand in it? 

Monday, May 13, 2024

Welcome to the UNIT - The De-Dollarization Bombshell | Pepe Escobar

Welcome to the UNIT – a concept that has already been discussed by the financial services and investments working group set up by the BRICS+ Business Council and has a serious shot at becoming official BRICS+ policy as early as in 2025.

  » The UNIT is a new form of international currency that can be issued 
in a de-centralized way, and then recognized and regulated at national level.  «

[...] The Global Majority has had enough of the centrally controlled monetary framework put in place 80 years ago in Bretton Woods and its endemic flaws: chronic deficits fueling irresponsible military spending; speculative bubbles; politically motivated sanctions and secondary sanctions; abuse of settlement and payment infrastructure; protectionism; and the lack of fair arbitration. In contrast, the UNIT proposes a reliable, quick and economically efficient solution for cross-border payments. The - transactional - UNIT is a game-changer as a new form of international currency that can be issued in a de-centralized way, and then recognized and regulated at national level.

  » Decoupling money from politics will undoubtedly offer unique opportunities 
for fair trade and investments across the globe removing economic bypasses created by 
political power plays and irresponsible fiscal and monetary policies.  «

The strength of the UNIT, conceptually, is to remove direct dependency on the currency of other nations, and to offer especially to the Global Majority a new form of apolitical money - with huge potential for anchoring fair trade and investments. It is indeed a new concept in terms of an international currency - anchored in gold (40%) and BRICS+ currencies (60%). It is neither crypto nor stablecoin. [...] The endgame is that everyone, essentially, may use the UNIT for accounting, bookkeeping, pricing, settling, paying, saving and investing.

 

See
also:

Wednesday, May 8, 2024

The US is in Decline and Desperate Need to Modernize | President of Mexico

After a report from the US State Department about the allegedly poor human rights situation in Mexico, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) launched a counterattack. He warned Washington that there was no government in the world that had the right to interfere in the politics of another nation. Only the USA has repeatedly claimed such special rights in the past. AMLO pronounced: "Mexico will not tolerate such interference. Mexico will never be a protectorate or a colony of another country. Mexico is a free, independent and sovereign country."

  » That's just how they are. They are stagnant and ossified in decadence.
They are in decline and desperately need to modernize. 
The US must change their arrogant interventionist foreign policy.  «
 Andrés Manuel López Obrador, President of Mexico - April 24, 2024.

AMLO condemned US funding of so-called NGOs
- such as terrorist groups and drug cartels - that attack Mexico's legitimate government and its courts. It is above all the USA that should not lean too far out of the window when it comes to human rights: "Imagine if we would announce that the USA are violating human rights, political rights and freedoms, that the Statue of Liberty would be an empty symbol just because they have a presidential candidate who is constantly being dragged into court. How they want to talk about human rights when they are pouring billions of dollars into wars that result in the deaths of innocent people around the world? Why don't they release Assange? Where is the freedom? "

"United States governments are meddling in the internal politics of other countries for at least two centuries. And it is not only giving opinions of good conduct as if they were the judge of the world. They are also intervening militarily in countries with governments not subject to the interests of the United States. That's the story. They used to appoint and remove presidents as they pleased. That is the history of the people of Latin America. Well, in our history they invaded us twice. The first time they forced the Mexican government to sign the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty, that is: we lost half of our territory and nine of the fifty US federal states belonged to Mexico. We have not forgotten US Invasions. We have insisted a lot and we will continue to do so: The US must change their arrogant interventionist foreign policy."
 
» Cancel NAFTA. Ditch the dollar. Re-issue the Mexican gold peso. Join the BRICs. « For now these topics are official diplomatic taboos still. But chained to a sinking ship, the US' biggest trading partner becomes increasingly fed up with the inflation-dollar fraud, the drug-war-pandemic-genocide economy and the insane migration industry of its northern neighbor.

"
How come they allocate so much money to war? Why they do not allocate funds to care for their young people who are suffering from drug use; unfortunately, 100,000 young people die every year from fentanyl use. But that's just how they are. And we shouldn't be surprised. That is how it has been historically. That indicates that they are stagnant, and ossified in decadence. They are in decline and desperately need to modernize."

Quoted from: 

It is unlikely that we can avoid a Third World War | Martin Armstrong

Piero Messina: Fukuyama advocated the end of history. Huntington spoke of a clash of civilizations. Is it possible to imagine a third way?

Martin Armstrong: Our greatest threat is centralized control; that is what doomed communism. I agree with Huntington that the clash of civilizations will be based upon cultures and religion mainly because of centralized attempt to impose a unified culture.
 
 » It is unlikely that we can avoid world war. 
Governments need war because their debts are no longer sustainable. 
They will use the war as the excuse for defaults – as was the case for WWII. 
They will create Bretton Woods II with the IMF digital currency as the reserve.
I believe we have a third world war that will begin piecemeal with the Middle East, Iran vs Israel, 
Europe vs Russia, North Korea vs Japan and South Korea, China vs Taiwan. 
But they will eventually merge together. «

At the end of the 1980s, the reference geopolitical model was the unipolar world, based on Western primacy. What cultural, military, and economic pillars is the Washington Consensus based on? Is it true freedom?

The military in economic pillars that dominate Washington today have nothing to do with freedom. They have to do with people who were unwilling to accept the collapse of communism. Whereby the enemy was transformed by communism to ethnic racism.

With the birth of the BRICS, is it possible to talk about a multipolar option? What are the limits that you see in this geopolitical dimension?

The birth of the BRICS was caused by these people we call the Neocons who engaged in ethnic racism and targeted Russia by removing them from the world economy under SWIFT. This woke up many in the world, realizing that the dollar was now being weaponized and was no longer a monetary instrument exclusively. Nations began to realize if they did not conform to the commands of Washington, then they to could be removed from SWIFT. Thus they have divided the world economy bringing to an end globalization.

Your analysis and studies seems to reveal several critical issues regarding the stability of the so-called Western system. There is a profound crisis of democratic systems, there is a lot of mistrust towards mainstream information and above all there are “agents” external to the institutions (an example above all is the activity of George Soros) who seem to influence the choices of governments in the United States and Western Europe. What could happen in the immediate future and in the coming years?

It has been propaganda that we live under a democracy. We live under republics in which case the people are represented and have no right to vote on critical issues. Republics historically are the most corrupt forms of government compared to a monarchy or dictatorship which cannot be bribed. In a republic, all representatives lacking term limits are up for sale to the highest bidder. This has resulted in the collapse of confidence in government both in Europe and the US which have fallen below 30% – the lowest since WWII. External agents such as George Soros, Bill Gates, World Economic Forum, push personal agendas which has further undermined the confidence in our systems. It is the government that decides if we go to war or not. The people are never asked.

 » It has been propaganda that we live under a democracy
We live under republics in which case the people are represented and have no right to vote on critical issues. 
Republics historically are the most corrupt forms of government. «

We invite you to make some reflections on the geoeconomic dimension. The global capitalist system is based on the indebtedness of sovereign states. Is this a sustainable situation? Who will pay the bill in the end?

The sovereign debt crisis that we face has appeared often throughout history. It is unsustainable because governments act in their own self-interest and will always expand debt to retain power. Historically, these systems collapse when they issue new debt to pay off the old, and no one is there to buy the new debt. Once they can no longer continue to borrow new money, then inevitably, they collapse.

Your predictive model is based on precise calculations. The cycles of history and the economy thus seem to chase each other along the time span of history. If I’m not mistaken, you compared the current context to the crisis and dissolution of the Roman Empire. Is it correct?

History repeats because human nature never changes. The Roman Empire is but one example from history of its success and failures. It lasted longer than anyone because it did not impose cultural regulations. The Christians called them pagans because they had so many Gods. That was the product of their policy of freedom of religion. Athens had Athena, Northern Europe had Thor, so they did not try to change the culture of the lands they conquered. They created a common market where someone in Britain could sell products to someone in Rome. So the freedom of religion, low taxation, freedom of movement, and a common market combined to create the Pax Romana.

Is it still possible to avoid a large-scale world conflict?

It is unlikely that we can avoid world war. Governments need war because their debts are no longer sustainable. They will use the war as the excuse for defaults – as was the case for WWII. They will create Bretton Woods II with the IMF digital currency as the reserve.

Pope Francis has been talking about a piecemeal Third World War for years. From your point of view, is what the Holy Father claims can be shared? What are the main weapons of this possible Third World War?

I believe we have a third world war that will begin piecemeal with the Middle East, Iran vs Israel, Europe vs Russia, north Korea vs Japan and South Korea, China vs Taiwan. But they will eventually merge together.

Have you argued that the true wealth of a state is its people? Why did we forget about all this? Above all, who is it convenient for?

The wealth of every nation is its people. That has been proven with the rise of Germany and Japan after WWII. This is the essence of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand.” But those in government prefer Marx, for he advocates that the state has the power to manipulate the people. So, Governments have forgotten it and reject Smith because Marx provides them with more power.

Is it correct to claim that your analysis succeed in covering the intersection of geopolitics, global markets and economic confidence? Can you explain to us in a simple way how your Socrates predictive model works? By the way, why did you name it just like the Greek philosopher?

I named my computer model after Socrates because the oracle of Delphi had said that he was the smartest man in Greece. He tried to prove the oracle wrong and the process proved it to be correct. He was put on trial and sentenced to death because he knew too much. My computer has taught me a lot in geopolitics, we had a major bank in Lebanon in the 1980’s and they asked if I could create a model on the Lebanese pound. I put the data in the computer and it came out and said their country would fall apart in 8 days. I thought something was wrong with the data. When I told the client, they asked me what currency would be best, and I said the Swiss Franc. Eight days later the civil war began. Obviously they saw the movement of money themselves and came to me for the timing. The same thing happened with a client in Saudi Arabia who was a big shipper. He called me asking me what gold would do tomorrow because Iran was going to begin attacking shipping in the gulf. So once again, there was advanced information about war. By 1998, I understood how the computer was forecasting such events. I warned in June at our London conference that Russia was about to collapse. The London financial Times had snuck into the back of the room and reported that forecast on the front of their newspaper on June 27th 1998. Russia collapsed about 6 weeks later.

Are unpredictable events, such as the terrorist attack in Moscow, also considered among the parameters of your predictive model? A “black swan” type event can change the course of history and geopolitical relations?

Yes, we saw the capital flows shift a day in advance, up to a week in advance in the case of the attack in Israel. The defense stocks began to rise even with 9/11 the government used our model to look at who bought puts on airlines in the days before. Someone always knows when they’re going to do these types of events. And they move their money either to profit or to avoid a loss. The computer is tracking everything. It cannot tell me which person has done it. Just that the move is about to take place.

 
 » America is a Golden Calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece. «
 

Saturday, May 4, 2024

The Great Replacement - Europe has fallen | Eva Vlaardingerbroek

Their message is clear. Our way of life, our Christian religion, our nations, they have to go without exception. Their vision of the future is the neoliberal, unrecognizable Europe, where every city becomes kind of like Brussels. Ugly, dirty, unsafe, zero social cohesion. And what are we left with? A permanent state of isolation, confusion and disorientation. 

» Everyone who has eyes can see it:
The native white Christian European population is being replaced at an ever-accelerating rate.«
 
[...] So what's the antidote? A strong Christian Europe of sovereign nation states. That's why we need to outright reject the lie that nationalism causes war. It's not nationalism or national sovereignty that causes war. It's expansionism. And where in Europe do we find that nowadays? In one place and one place only: Brussels. Isn't it funny how the same people who erode our national sovereignty are now telling us that we need to spend billions and billions of euros on the national sovereignty of Ukraine?

» I am going to draw the forbidden conclusion:
The Great Replacement Theory is no longer a theory.«  

[...] During a recent interview I got asked: "Do you think that you ever go too far? Do you think that you're ever too radical?" I thought about it for a second and said: "No, I don't think I go too far." Truth be told. I think we in Europe do not go far enough. I think that if we really think about the organized structural attack on our civilization, that we don't do enough. Do we do enough to stop the attack on our families, on our continent, on our countries and our religion? When we hear about another murder, another stabbing of a young innocent child, do we do enough? When we know that our national sovereignty has been given up in Brussels, do we do enough? When we hear that Christian kids in Germany are now converting to Islam to fit in, do we do enough? I don't think so. 
 

The totalitarian institution of the European Union needs to come down. Let me be clear: I don't believe in reforms. When the foundation of your institution is rotten, and that is the case in Brussels, you can rebuild the house on top of it all you want, but it's still going to crumble. So the only answer is: The Tower of Babel needs to be destroyed! We are the daughters and sons of the greatest nations on Earth. And we need to ask ourselves, what has happened to us? Where do we come from? And more importantly, where are we going? 
 
Our elites have declared a war on us, and now it is time for us to put on the full armor of God, fight back and win.  
 
 
April 25, 2024
 
"The Islamic New World Order is Here - Europe has fallen."
Speech at the 'Conservative Political Action Conference' in Budapest, Hungary.

Thursday, May 2, 2024

The Kremlin's Last Warning | Martin Armstrong

Dmitry Konstantinovich Kiselyov (born 1954) is a major TV host, and his latest warning to the West is to issue an ultimatum to the UK and the US. On Russian TV, Kiselyov warned [on April 29, 2024] that if a Western power deploys soldiers on the ground in Ukraine to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, it will result in Armageddon. Of course, what I find stunning is how the Western press characterizes him as “Vladimir Putin’s propagandist,” and the implication of those words is that they are not a real threat. 
 
» Then the very moment would come. ‌«
RS-28 Sarmat [dubbed 'Satan II' by NATO] is Russia's most capable hypersonic thermonuclear intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). With a range of 18,000 km and traveling 27 times the speed of sound, Sarmat can extinguish any target/country/enemy anywhere on the planet within minutes with one single strike. Including the US - May 1, 2024.

The press takes NOTHING said from Russia seriously – it’s all a joke, just propaganda. [...] Kiselyov is not going to say this on national TV without the Kremlin actually delivering this warning. He said:  If NATO countries send their troops into Ukraine in order to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, then the very moment about which Putin once said, Why do we need the world, if there is no Russia in it? would come.‌

» Russia can turn the US into radioactive ash. This is not propaganda. ‌«
Dmitry Kiselyov, delivering the Kremlin's last warning - April 29, 2024

Russia has indeed threatened to turn the US into radioactive ash and sink Britain below the waves. While some NATO leaders have been more circumspect, this need for war to justify the defaulting on debt that is the real factor behind the West’s desire for war will have far greater consequences than these fake world leaders who are all hand puppets of the Neocons. Kiselyov added: This is not propaganda. Yet in the West, the Neocons are saying this is a bluff, and Putin will never use nukes so the West can completely destroy Russia – their hated enemy for decades, without a shot fired.

Quoted from:
 
» There seems to be a conspiracy in the British Isles. Why threaten boundless Russia with nuclear weapons while sitting on a small island? The island is so small that one Sarmat missile is enough to sink it once and for all. This is just one launch, and there is no England, once and for all! Another option to plunge Britain into the abyss is the Russian Poseidon. There is no way to stop this underwater drone. It has a warhead with a capacity of up to 100 megatons. The explosion of this thermonuclear torpedo off the coast of Britain will raise a giant wave up to 500 meters high. Such a squall of water is also a carrier of extreme doses of radiation. Passing over the British Isles, it will turn what may be left of them into a radioactive desert. ‌«
Dmitry Kiselyov - May 2, 2022.

Friday, April 5, 2024

Israel attacked Iran | Alexander Dugin

Israel attacked Iran. In Syria, which is not Israel or Palestine. This is an act of aggression. Now Iran has no choice but to attack Israel. With all the forces of the Resistance. This war will be started by the Shiites, but at some point it cannot but become a war of all Muslims.

  » Everyone can see the tactics that are used to defeat the enemy in war.
But what no one can see is the strategy from which great victory arises. «
Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

We must take into account timing: Biden does not want it at all, as his priority is the election and support for Ukraine against Russians, but Trump, on the other hand, does not care about Russians, but Israel is dear to him. 
 
Therefore, Tehran has every reason to start a war with Israel as soon as possible. Under Biden and before Trump. The US and NATO will definitely get involved, but with great reluctance. In the meantime Russians will take Kiev and strengthen dramatically anti-Western pole. That's where Trump will come in or civil war will break out in the US. And the world will already be irreversibly multipolar.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

The French Road to Nuclear War │ V.I.P.S.

ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The [U.S.] President [Joe Biden]
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (V.I.P.S.)
SUBJECT: On the Brink of Nuclear War
DATE:  March 24, 2024

Mr. President:

France is reportedly preparing to dispatch a force of some 2,000 troops — roughly a reinforced brigade built around an armored battalion and two mechanized battalions, with supporting logistical, engineering, and artillery troops attached — into Ukraine sometime in the not-so-distant future.

 » From a military-technical point of view, we are certainly ready for nuclear war.
Our nuclear triad is more advanced than any other one. Everyone knows it, all experts do. «
Vladimir Putin, March 13, 2024.

This force is purely symbolic, inasmuch as it would have zero survivability in a modern high-intensity conflict of the scope and scale of what is transpiring in Ukraine today. It would not be deployed directly in a conflict zone, but would serve either as (1) a screening force/tripwire to stop Russia’s advance; or (2) a replacement force deployed to a non-active zone to free up Ukrainian soldiers for combat duty. The French Brigade reportedly will be supplemented by smaller units from the Baltic states.

This would be introducing combat troops of a NATO country into a theater of war, making them “lawful targets” under the Law of War. Such units would apparently lack a NATO mandate. In Russia’s view, however, this may be a distinction without a difference. France appears to be betting – naively – that its membership in NATO would prevent Russia from attacking French troops. Rather, it is highly likely that Russia would attack any French/Baltic contingent in Ukraine and quickly destroy/degrade its combat viability.

» In fact, it would be useful for the good of the cause for the restless French to send a few regiments to Neonaziland.
Their systematic destruction would not be the most difficult task, but the most important. 
And it will be a good lesson for the rest of Europe's restless cretins. «
 Dmitry Medvedev, March 20, 2024.

In that case, French President Macron may calculate that, after Russian attacks on the troops of NATO members – NATO mandate or not – he could invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter and get the NATO alliance to intervene. Such intervention would likely take the form of aircraft operating from NATO nations – and perhaps include interdiction missions against tactical targets inside Russia. 
 
Doctrinally, and by legal right, Russia’s response would be to launch retaliatory strikes also against targets in NATO countries. If NATO then attacks strategic targets inside Russia, at that point Russia’s nuclear doctrine takes over, and NATO decision-making centers would be hit with nuclear weapons.

» REGULAR TROOPS from France, Germany and Poland have arrived, by rail and air, to Cherkassy, south of Kiev. «
 Pepe Escobar via Telegram, March 22, 2024.
 
We do not believe Russia will initiate a nuclear attack against the U.S., but rather would leave it up to the United States to decide if it wants to risk destruction by preparing to launch a nuclear strike on Russia. That said, Russian strategic forces have improved to the point that, in some areas – hypersonic missiles, for example – its capability surpasses that of the U.S. and NATO. 
 
In other words, the Russian temptation to strike first may be a bit stronger than during past crises, and we are somewhat less confident that Russia would want to “go second”. Another disquieting factor is that the Russians are likely to believe that Macron’s folly has the tacit approval of some key U.S. and other Western officials, who seem desperate to find some way to alter the trajectory of the war in Ukraine – the more so, as elections draw near.
 

What Needs to Be Done
Europe needs to understand that France is leading it down a path of inevitable self-destruction.
The American people need to understand that Europe is leading them to the cusp of nuclear annihilation. 

Monday, March 25, 2024

From Prison to Palace │ Senegal's Faye will destroy French Neocolonialism

Historical events are brewing in yet another West African country: Senegal is getting rid of the neocolonial dependence on its former metropolis France. Bassirou Diomaye Faye, a charismatic opposition candidate who sought to break the treaty with France and improve relations with Russia won the presidential election last weekend. The 44-year-old was only freed from prison 10 days before. As part of his election campaign, Faye promised to review oil and gas deals with Western companies, including agreements with British Petroleum, Endeavor Mining and Kosmos Energy. The collapse of France's colonial empire in Africa continues. Hence the pitiful growl of Rothschild stooge Macron, who squandered the entire inheritance of the French colonialists.
 
 » The departure of Senegal from the CFA franc zone puts a final 
cross on the entire system of French neocolonialism. «

Faye advocates a radical revision of relations between Senegal and France. And as part of this, Faye is going to follow neighboring Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso to leave the French currency system by abandoning the CFA franc. And the French military will have to leave Senegal. Sensing something was wrong, Paris had already announced a little earlier that it was sharply reducing the military contingent in Senegal (probably so that it would not be so shameful later). In return, Faye promises to take a course towards rapprochement with Russia.
 

Thus, France's next major foreign policy defeat on the African continent looms on the horizon. Moreover, last year Senegal still was a servile French key player in the issue of the blockade of Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali, which had previously freed themselves from the influence of Paris. And the departure of Senegal from the CFA franc zone puts a final and fat cross on the system which brought huge profits to France and on which the entire system of French neocolonialism was essentially built. 
 

 » France is the equivalent of an overfed Chihuahua, and you don't want to get in the ring with the really 
beefed up Rottweilers, especially when they've been trained to eat overfed Chihuahuas their entire life. «
Scott Ritter - March 21, 2024.

And hence all of Macron’s current anti-Russian hysteria. He lost access to Niger's gold and uranium last year, and now, like a plucked rooster, understands that France is also losing to Russia. Ukraine for him is the last chance to spoil Moscow. He will be disappointed there too.
 

Tuesday, March 5, 2024

On Realism and War with China | John Mearsheimer

Lex Fridman: The communication gap between China and the United States seems to be much greater than that of what was the former Soviet Union and the United States.
 
Mearchiavelli,
Machiavelli's revenant.
 
John Mearsheimer: It’s an interesting question. A lot of people describe the Cold War as an ideological competition above all else.
Communism versus liberal democracy or communism versus liberal capitalism, whatever. I actually don’t believe that. The Soviets were realists to the core. Stalin was a realist par excellence, and ideology did not matter much in Stalin’s foreign policy. And if you look at Soviet foreign policy after World War II, throughout the Cold War, they were realists to the core. And in those days the Americans were realists. Sure, a lot of liberal ideology floating around out there, but the Americans were realists. One of the reasons we avoided a shooting match between the United States and the Soviet Union from 1947 to 1989 was because both sides understood the basic balance of power logic.
 
The US-China competition is somewhat different. But first of all, the Chinese are realists to the core. I’ve spent a lot of time in China. I am basically a rock star in China. The Chinese are my kind of people. They are realists. They speak my language. It’s the United States that is no longer very realist. American leaders have a very powerful liberal bent and tend not to see the world in realist terms.
 
That’s fascinating. So the Chinese are pragmatic realists and think of the world as a competition of military powers?
 
Yeah, you are actually right. And I think we will avoid war. The problem with the Americans is, it’s not just their liberalism. It’s the possibility that we will pursue a rollback policy. During the Cold War the American grand strategy towards the Soviet Union was: containment, containment, containment. We now know from the historical record that the United States was not only pursuing containment. We were trying to rollback Soviet power to put it bluntly. We were trying to wreck the Soviet Union. And I would not be surprised moving forward with regard to China if the United States pursues a serious rollback policy.
 
So you’re saying throughout history the United States was always pursuing rollback policies? 

Look, you don’t respect the power of other nations. You fear the power of other nations.
 
Will there be a war with China in the 21st century?
 
I don’t know. But my argument is yes, there will be war with China