Tag Archives: Retaliation

Monday Night with Matt

In this post I just pour out my thoughts on anything that comes to my mind. The first thing that comes to my mind is the prospect of nuclear war. When is it going to happen?

First, there are rules for everything. In this case we must treat the prospect of nuclear war just like a forest that is ready to burn down. Just because it is ready does not mean it will burn down immediately. One must wait for the right conditions. For example, summer might be the best time for a major forest fire.

The overall conditions exist for a major war between the US, China and/or Russia. Nobody is worried about it because everyone knows that a nuclear attack on the US is impossible. It would mean death for the other-side, so they would never do it.

Let me tell you a little story about AIG. The director of the Credit Default Swap department (the department that blew up AIG) said the premium for his default swaps was like free money. Calculations showed that it would be impossible for the default swaps he was selling to blow up. Yet blow up they did. Maybe he didn’t understand something.

Anyway, today no one is worried about a nuclear war because of the US retaliation. Well, let me tell you something. Leaders are worried about themselves. And if they can survive then that might be all that is needed. Obviously, not just them, but the military and a few million citizens might be all they need if they can finish off the other side. And that is where the US finds itself today.

The US can retaliate one time, then it has nothing and it is finished. The important people on the other side will survive and retain the ability to launch one additional nuclear attack.

There is going to be an event that happens that causes China and/or Russia to plan for a nuclear attack. We are now waiting for that event. The possibilities surround the Senkaku Islands and Israel. If something serious happens then start worrying.

Generally, I expect things to play out before 2025. Starting in the summer of 2011 I started worrying about an event that would act as a catalyst for a great-power war. Nothing happened in 2011. Then it moved to the summer of 2012. Again, nothing happened. We are now in the summer of 2013. I don’t really expect anything big to happen. It is the summer of 2014 and spring of 2015 that has me worried.

It seems that all trends pointing toward a great-power war are getting worse. I am seeing more and more articles written about a China-US war possibility. Putin is becoming more and more like Stalin, or at least more dangerous. The Middle East is about ready to blow up and somehow suck in Israel. China’s aggression in the South China Sea and East China Sea is getting worse.

I’m looking to 2014 and 2015 because of Bible prophecy: Comet ISON, blood moons, sabbath year (2014) and Jubilee year (2015).

If nothing happens in 2014 and 2015 then we have to keep watching until either something big happens or the trends start going in a different direction.

Changing topics

A few months ago I told you about some legal problems that I was having concerning a contract renewal. It’s been about 4 months since the end of the contract and I haven’t heard or seen anything. I found out that the guy was convicted of sexually assaulting two female students a few years ago. He got fired from a national coaching job. Then he got fired from a prominent school when it found out. Finally, he started his own school. Also, he has been playing contract games with other people too.

I really don’t think I will be hearing about his issue again. So I believe it’s over. If not, then I will reveal everything I know to the judge.

Changing topics

Sponsored Ads

Since I am a mathematician, you are getting a different prospective on world events. I tend not to be hung up on emotions that say nuclear war is impossible. In 2003 when the first thought of nuclear war entered my mind, it never occurred to me that it was not possible. Only that the right conditions must be present, like they are now. As I warned people about trouble I noticed that it was not registering in their mind. It was as if I hadn’t said anything.

I studied Bible prophecy and started warning pastors and church members, but it was not registering. Nobody was really prepared to think about why trouble was coming.

Now that it is about 10 years later, and big trouble has still not arrived, one can get a little burnt out. So I tend to think in terms of trends and the accumulation of things, and less about something big. We are trending in the direction of something big. I don’t know when it will happen. I think it might be 2014 and 2015, but who knows.

If I am wrong about a great-power war involving the US, China and/or Russia, then it doesn’t matter. Once Iran gets a nuclear arsenal then all bets are off. The concept of MAD does not apply to Iran. Probably before 2025 I will have to start a nuclear war watch for Iran.

Changing topics

Why no comments on this blog? I shut down the comments section because of trolls. People who systematically set out to undermine this blog. Disagreement is fine, but systematically trying to undermine this blog is a problem. Also, I just don’t have time to debate liberals and think it is pointless. If I look into the sky and you say that is down, then that is a pretty big problem. Should I waste my time trying to argue otherwise? Liberals flip the world upside-down. Arguing is pointless unless you like to argue.

I am a hardcore conservative. So this blog reflect my biases. Generally, I think modern liberalism is like AIDS. It won’t kill you directly, but it will make it possible for other things to get you. That is a violation of rule #1: If I am dead then nothing else matters. That means keeping me (and my family too) alive and well is the number one objective. Modern liberalism heavily interferes with that objective. They want to gut our nuclear arsenal and take away our guns. In my mind something is deeply wrong about this. The world has been flipped upside-down to the point where now I am in danger. And that’s a problem.

One way to survive is to be off the radar screen by moving to another country. Easier said than done, unfortunately. It’s not like countries are flinging open their doors. And what if you can’t get a job in another country?

My family has been living in Switzerland over two years now. We are still working on language issues by using tutors and studying German. Obviously, we are a lot better at speaking German than when we first got here, but it still takes effort. This whole transition thing has not been easy. Although, it helps if failure is not an option. If you can’t fail then you won’t. You will find a way to make it work. Going back to the US was not an option for me. Therefore, failure was not an option.

My youngest son, who is in kindergarten, is pretty fluent in German. My other son understands, but is slow in speaking. Currently, he gets 4 hours of tutoring a week over Skype. My wife and I are studying too.

Switzerland is like the US should be. It has strong states and a weak federal government. Most income tax is paid to the states. The states call most of the shots. So I like the governing structure of Switzerland.

Tina Turner lives right across the lake from me. She just became a Swiss citizen and got married too. Photographers used drones to get pictures of her wedding at her mansion.

Changing topics

I hope you find the material I post interesting. Hopefully, I am wrong about everything, and we can ignore this nasty stuff about nuclear war.

Auf Wiedersehen


Thanks to Syria, Timing of Looming Iran Crisis Is Fortuitous « Commentary Magazine

But thanks to the Syrian civil war, the threat of Iranian retaliation has been dramatically reduced. Partly, of course, that’s because two of Iran’s principal allies, Syria and Hezbollah, are too preoccupied with that war to be able to mount serious reprisals against anyone. But even more importantly, the tremendous importance Iran attaches to Syria gives both Israel and America a powerful lever with which to restrain any Iranian reprisals.

Iran has poured billions of dollars and thousands of crack fighters–from Hezbollah, Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, and its own Revolutionary Guards Corps–into propping up Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria, because it deems Assad’s survival strategically vital. As one senior Iranian cleric explained in February, “Syria is the 35th province [of Iran] and a strategic province for us. If the enemy attacks us and wants to take either Syria or Khuzestan [in western Iran], the priority for us is to keep Syria….If we keep Syria, we can get Khuzestan back too, but if we lose Syria, we cannot keep Tehran.”

Thanks to Syria, Timing of Looming Iran Crisis Is Fortuitous « Commentary Magazine

Does cutting U.S. nukes really matter? – CNN.com

Can the United States maintain its current level of nuclear security with fewer nuclear weapons — if the weapons are more accurate?

For nuclear weapons analyst Michaela Dodge of the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank, the answer is no. It’s all about targeting, she says. Having fewer weapons allows fewer possible targets. According to Dodge, having fewer weapons to reach the same or increased number of targets is bad. With lower numbers of nukes, the U.S. won’t have enough weapons to cover military targets in Russia, China and elsewhere, she says.

As an alternative, war planners will be forced to consider shifting targets toward civilian populations. “That is just not a good idea,” she says, adding that it brings new ethical and moral choices into play.

Does cutting U.S. nukes really matter? – CNN.com

What happens when you bet everything on one assumption that might not be true?

The Fall of Long-Term Capital Management

John Meriwether, super-brain, helped put together LTCM. Between 1994 and 1998, the fund showed a return on investment of more than 40% per annum. However, its enormously leveraged gamble with various forms of arbitrage involving more than $1 trillion dollars went bad, and in one month, LTCM lost $1.9 billion.

LTCM bet everything on one key assumption that was wrong: People make their decisions independently.

Concerning the US nuclear arsenal, it is based on one key assumption that is wrong: Leaders put their people before themselves.

Leaders will not risk attacking the US because the subsequent retaliation will kill too many people. In fact they will risk attacking the US if the leaders and military can survive the retaliation. In the past the US could retaliate many times over many years – ensuring the death of leaders and military. Now it can only retaliate one time, and that is not enough. The red line has already been crossed. Given the right circumstances the US is currently in trouble.

Lebanon threatens retaliation against future Syrian attacks | The Times of Israel

Lebanese army officials issued a stark warning to the Syrian government Wednesday, stating that any further attack by Syrian forces on sites across the border will be immediately met with a forceful response. The comments came after a Syrian government helicopter fired three missiles on the northern Lebanese border town of Arsal earlier Wednesday.

“Army units deployed in the [Arsal] area took the necessary defensive measures to respond immediately to any similar violations,” read the Lebanese army’s official statement.

Lebanon threatens retaliation against future Syrian attacks | The Times of Israel

It looks like Lebanon has some stability issues. Shiite Muslims (Hezbollah) are helping Syria, and Sunni Muslims are helping the rebels.

Scenario: The night Israel decides to attack Syria again

Even more serious, say the experts, is that Syria is liable to decide to transfer these modern missiles to Hezbollah, or even give a sample of them to its partner, Iran, whose scientists are eager to decipher Russian technologies. Intelligence officials and air force commanders will pressure the ministers to attack quickly and thus exploit this opportunity. The information, they’ll say, is temporary and fluid: If we don’t take action now, there’s no way of knowing where Hezbollah will hide these missiles in Lebanon later on. It’s important to prevent a change in the military equation in the north with weapons that “break the balance of power.”

All these are certainly threats that cannot be dismissed. But if the ministers approve such a move, Israel could be a step away from war with both Syria and Hezbollah, even though its rivals have even less of an interest in such a military confrontation than Israel does.

This scenario is not totally divorced from reality. According to foreign media reports, this is more or less what preceded the second air strike (of the three this year) attributed to Israel, which took place in late April.

From here one can assess with a great degree of certainty that there will be additional attempts to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah in the coming months.

That’s the background to the long series of Israeli warnings ­ from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and his predecessor Ehud Barak ­ that Israel will act to foil the smuggling of quality weapons into Lebanon.

Scenario: The night Israel decides to attack Syria again

If Israel attacks Syria again then I think we are looking at major retaliation coming from Syria and Hezbollah. I think Syria will decide when this scenario happens as it attempts to transfer advanced weapons to Hezbollah.

There is an excellent possibility of war happening at any time. We could see a delay of weeks or months but the credible possibility exists right now.


New U.S. weapons have China worried | Opinion | The Japan Times

Writing on the China-U.S. Focus website on April 22, Major Gen. Yao Yunzhu, director of China-America Defense Relations at the Chinese Armed Forces Academy of Military Science, said that Chinese concerns stemmed from two facts:

• The ballistic missile defense systems that the U.S. and its allies had deployed, or were planning to deploy, in the Asia-Pacific region could intercept residue Chinese nuclear weapons launched for retaliation after China had been attacked, thus potentially negating the deterrence effect of the Chinese nuclear arsenal.

• The U.S. was developing a series of conventional strategic strike capabilities. When deployed, they could be used to hit China’s nuclear arsenal.

New U.S. weapons have China worried | Opinion | The Japan Times

Nuclear Weapons: How Few Is Too Few? – Forbes

Let’s hope this latest effort to limit nuclear weapons turns out better than Obama’s gun-control initiatives in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook tragedy.  However, there is good reason to believe it won’t, and for much the same reason that the National Rifle Association says gun control is a bad idea: if guns are illegal, then only criminals will have guns.  What’s the connection?  I’ll come back to that later, but first let me tell you a little bit about the Obama worldview.

[My comment: If you eliminate your nukes and your enemy cheats, then only your enemy will have nuclear weapons.]

Some supporters of nuclear disarmament describe our current approach to nuclear strategy as a failure of imagination that one day could lead to unprecedented catastrophe (proponents of missile defense often say the same thing).  However, it may be that what the Obama Administration has failed to imagine in its strategic calculations is just how bad the global situation might become if Russia’s next leader is a neo-fascist, or China decides to pursue regional hegemony.  There’s no way of knowing for sure when our efforts to shrink the nuclear arsenal cross the invisible line into greater vulnerability, but it may be we are already there today.

Nuclear Weapons: How Few Is Too Few? – Forbes

“There’s no way of knowing for sure when our efforts to shrink the nuclear arsenal cross the invisible line into greater vulnerability, but it may be we are already there today.”

We’ve already crossed the line. Here is the problem: Everybody assumes that our enemies are never willing to absorb one nuclear strike in retaliation. In one retaliatory nuclear strike the enemy’s leaders can survive, but the people take a hit. Would enemy leaders ever accept this?

What if enemy leaders are afraid of revolution? That means if they do nothing then they might die.

What if enemy leaders are afraid of stumbling into a nuclear war with the US? If they do nothing then they might die.

A US that can only retaliate one time might be a tempting target (right now) if given the right excuse. All other options for these leaders might be worse. Yes, their people take a hit, but the leaders will survive. And when was the last time totalitarian leaders put the people before themselves?

Finally, underground bunkers can ensure the survival of militaries and a few million citizens. Also, one might expect that around 90% to 95% of the population will die in a nuclear war. That still leaves 5% to 10% surviving. In China that is still a big number.

The key to preventing this is the ability to retaliate many times over many years. Then the leaders know that they themselves cannot survive.

Do you think that people who just experienced a massive crisis (World War II) just might have more wisdom about national security than a people who have never experienced one?

Will Israel destroy Russian missiles? – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews

The question is – what will happen next time? Assad has apparently not given up on his plan to supply Hezbollah with “deterrence diminishing” weapons as a reward for the Shiite group’s assistance in his regime’s battle for survival. Assad also wants Hezbollah to safeguard his strategic weapons systems so they will not fall into rebel hands.

This is why the West estimates Israel will apparently be forced to attack – perhaps in the near future – additional arms shipments making their way from Iran to Hezbollah via Syria. It is also estimated that Assad would have to respond, despite the fact that he has almost no effective retaliation options. The Syrian army, in its current state, cannot attack us on the ground, and if it fires missiles toward Israel’s home front, Israel will destroy most of the Assad regime’s military assets, and other assets, which are crucial for its continued survival.

Will Israel destroy Russian missiles? – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews

Iran threatens response to alleged Israeli strike in Syria | JPost | Israel News

The paper quotes Iranian sources as saying the response to Israel’s alleged strikes will be made on two levels. The first being “blows under the belt in several locations,” which could be done inside Syria under the policy of “contain, squeeze and crush,” or outside of it, while maintaining the “terror balance.”

The second possible way of response will be calling a meeting of “the friends of the Syrian people” in Tehran in two weeks, in which Iran will “announce a new initiative for a Syrian solution.” More than 40 countries will be invited, and President Assad will be represented by ministers Ali Haidar and Qadri Jamil.

Iran threatens response to alleged Israeli strike in Syria | JPost | Israel News

Two weeks from today is May 23rd. This meeting could be significant. We could see a major retaliation against Israel after May 23rd.

Israel’s Three Gambles | Foreign Policy

Can Israel get away with its attacks on the Syrian regime?

Israel’s recent attacks against Syria are the latest, dramatic development in a conflict that is already spiraling out of control. In the past few days, Israeli aircraft reportedly targeted Iranian surface-to-surface missiles headed for Hezbollah, as well as Syrian missiles in a military base in the outskirts of Damascus. Israel’s strikes show, once again, its intelligence services’ ability to penetrate the Iran’s arms shipment route to Lebanon and its military’s skill in striking adversaries with seeming impunity. But Israel is also risking retaliation and further destabilization of its own neighborhood — in ways that may come back to haunt it.

Israel’s Three Gambles – By Daniel Byman and Natan Sachs | Foreign Policy