Scenarios for the next big thing?

Iran is getting prodded by Israel at the moment. I see that there are reports of Iranian and Chinese accesses of the Dominion voting systems during the US election too.

Word has it that there could be some form of cyber attack on Western infrastructure at some point in the near future. It would be very handy pinning that on Iran, citing revenge on attacks on them.

Think of the TV to feed the obedientsia’s media-addled minds if the power grid kept going down. Hospital patients dying in the street, transport accidents, sheer inability to access Facepuke and Twatter culminating in babies throwing themselves out of incubators!


What d’ya think?

A false flag cyber attack seems to be what they’re telegraphing at the moment. Although Billy boy is talking about ‘Pandemic 2’ as the next crisis.

Maybe Phil can give us a preview

Sorry, back in the real world it’s impossible to get anything done if you start every thought about everything with an analysis of how it’s a false flag.

Amazingly enough, most things that happen aren’t false flags.

Unless it involves oil rich ME countries in which case your ‘exception’ is more the rule.

Yup. If we can all manage to get real for a moment, Iran has no vested interest in engaging in a war they would lose, or at least get substantially destroyed if Russia and/or China stepped in to prevent total loss. Just as Syria had nothing to gain from using chemical weapons at a point it was winning the war.

Maybe Iran or China will get blamed for some mutated coronavirus. Maybe a mini-nuke “proving” that Iran has limited capability and must be stopped immediately. Turkey could play a part in that kind of op. It needs to be more dramatic than a couple of planes and buildings, all made of different but equally collapsible material (???), this time around.

Well, there you have it. Any retaliation from Iran is a false flag from the … … west? … NWO? I don’t know.

Come on, put a bit of effort in. You’d make a terrible lobbyist for a “defence” contractor.


It’s like having a Ministry Of Truth bot built into the forum

Who said there are no false flags? I just don’t think that poorly informed speculative fantasizing about them makes a great hobby.

But what would I know. I’m an amateur at this game.


Too bad you have to act of your own volition and identity if and when you attack Iran.

Trump’s term CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED that his support base doesn’t want these unnecessary wars.

Despite e.g yours, Judders, Viscofisy’s, Syd’s, Peter’s et al best efforts to pin war crimes on middle America, now you’re forced into acknowledging that it’s 90% your “liberal democrat” bullshit artist cabal that’s behind all of it.

When I attack Iran?

What, like when I say the Iranian regime are a nasty bunch, and both Iran and the rest of the world would be better off without them?

Or like when Trump launched a military strike against one of their generals and killed him?

Trump didn’t care about avoiding actions that could lead to war with Iran. He was just lucky things didn’t get further out of control. If US soldiers had died in the Iranian retaliation, that may well have happened.

Trump has done his best to strengthen the position of US allies in the middle east to contain Iran. Selling arms to Saudi Arabia, coordination with Israel, airstrikes on Iranian generals, pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal.

But back to the main point. Yeah, any cyber attack is most likely a false flag, because we know the Iranians would never do anything like that. After all they’re so primitive that they’ll have to throw calculators at US infrastructure.

Why would the be pissed off at the US anyway, with someone like Trump in charge? What did he ever do to them?

The world’s certainly been better off without your ‘wealthy white liberals’ calling all the shots, that’s for sure.

What, like deciding NOT to retaliatory bomb Iran for shooting down that drone, or after Iran’s retaliatory strike on the US airfield after the attack on Soleimani.

Yet another “If” scenario that has no basis in actual reality of how the measured responses played out.

The jury’s still out afaic about the attack on Soleimani, but it’s claimed that he was responsible for lethal attacks on US personnel.

False flag. Probably the same people who claim that Iran is conducting cyber attacks on the US.

Iran would never do either! Especially given how happy they must be to be treated the way Trump treated them after 8 years of evil liberal launching military strikes on them under Obama. They were feeling so safe with Trump in charge that they accidentally shot down an airliner.

Is there some point you’re trying to make that doesn’t skirt around the fact that the past four years have been way more peaceful than the decades preceding.

Even with the irony this is racist. Iran is an advanced country with intelligent leaders who are not going to wage war on the USA precisely because that would be incredibly stupid and absolutely not in their self interest. You must be confusing retaliatory gum-chomping with actual action.

Sure, poke the networks a bit in response to the inevitable back and forth that’s going on as we speak. But a major attack on infrastructure? No, that would be idiotic and almost certainly a false flag.

As would “releasing a mutated coronavirus/ebola virus” or whatever else your glorious thoughtmasters have been advertising for over the last months.

edit: sorry Bevo, wrong reply there. Calling @drumphil (o)!

Irony ain’t the word I’m thinking of hearing your explanation of how that is racist.

The rest is just fantastic dribble.

It’s an endless series of accusing people in the Middle East of being incapable of thinking not only strategically, but of being able to think beyond the ends of their noses. You think they are stupid.

“We” are the ever innocent. “We” are never the aggressors, even though “we” are the dominant force in the world in no small part thanks to enormous military, territorial and administrative expansions.

Nuclear war.

From you have been warned.

Six years ago the likelihood of a major war was tiny. Since then it has grown steadily and dramatically and today is by far the most likely major event in the 2020s. The ultimate conflict can come from two ways. A conventional conflict involving at least two major powers that escalates into an open nuclear war. A second scenario is possible in the 2025-2030 timeframe. A Russian sneak first strike against the United States and its allies with the new S-500, strategic missile defenses, Yasen-M submarines, INF Zircon and Kalibr missiles and some new space asset playing the key role. The sneak first strike would involve all Russian missile strategic forces branches (bombers and ground-based missiles) at the different stages of such attack that would be strategic translation of what was seen in Syria in November 2015. There was no report that the Russian had such a capability of launching a high precision, multiple, combined arms attack at targets 2,000+ kilometers away. Western intelligence had no clue. The irony is that since the end of the Cold War the United States has been maneuvering through NATO to achieve a position to execute a first strike over Russia and now it seems that the first strike may occur but the country finished would be the United States.

Another particularity of the Western system is that its individuals have been brainwashed to the point that the majority accept their moral high ground and technological edge as a given. This has given the rise of the supremacy of the emotional arguments over the rational ones which are ignored or deprecated. That mindset can play a key role in the upcoming catastrophic events. At least in the Soviet system the silent majority of the people were aware of the fallacies they were fed up. We can see the United States claims about G5 being stolen from them by China or hypersonic technology being stolen by Russia as the evidence that the Western elites are also infected by that hubris. Over the next decade it will become obvious that the West is falling behind the Russia-China block and the malaise might grow into desperation. Going to war might seem a quick and easy solution to restore the lost hegemony to finally find them into a France 1940 moment. Back then France did not have nuclear weapons to turn a defeat into a victory. The West might try that swap because the unpleasant prospect of not being Mars and Venus but rather a bully and his dirty bitch running away in fear while the rest of the world is laughing at them.

If there is not a dramatic change of course the world is going to witness the first nuclear war. The Western block collapse may come before, during or after the war. It does not matter. A nuclear war is a game with billions of casualties and the collapse plays in the hundreds of millions.

The irony is that since the end of the Cold War the United States has been maneuvering through NATO to achieve a position to execute a first strike over Russia

Yup. The kind of weapons Russia has been developing are a direct response to the encirclement by NATO. Remember the NATO excuse when Russia rightly accused it of breaking an agreement not to have military bases within X miles of Russia:

“Oh, we didn’t break the agreement because the agreement is that there won’t be any permanent military bases. The bases we have are not permanent because the staff are rotated every 6 months” (paraphrased)