[ExI] commies vs marxists was: RE: chinese fires, was:RE: book review

[Will Steinberg]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, 6:33 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *…*> *On Behalf Of *Will Steinberg via extropy-chat
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] commies vs marxists was: RE: chinese fires, was:RE:
> book review
>
>
>
> >…I think we're at an impasse regarding the political stuff.  I'm not left
> wing or right wing, and while I agree with some of what you are saying, I
> disagree highly with some of the other stuff, and with the presentation in
> general.  So I think I will refrain from discussing it now…
>
>
>
> Fair enough.  After I began pondering your comments on an earlier thread,
> I realized there is some context that many here may not know, but Adrian
> and I do: that incident happened in San Francisco.  Cities all over America
> solve their homeless and crazies situation by buying them one-way bus
> tickets to San Francisco.  It really isn’t the kind of place where one
> lives in a house in which any random crazy can punch his way in using a
> hammer.  One doesn’t even live there in a home where a random crazy can
> shoot his way in.  Anyone who owns 8 digits of net worth lives in a home
> which cannot be physically entered with anything less sincere than a
> bulldozer.
>
>
>
> With that context, you may now understand why when I heard the story some
> time after the fact, I laughed and asked OK what’s the real story?  How did
> the bad guy get in there?  How did that whole “greet the officer” business
> play out when these guys were in the process of struggling over a hammer?
> What did they do, call a temporary truce?  Hey it happens:
>
>
>
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=the+phone+is+ringing+pink+panther&sxsrf=ALiCzsbMAAdlAMQLC-KLtrvOngOhs6OrYA:1670282792720&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIgKOk0OP7AhVbJjQIHUlJDecQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1159&bih=1046&dpr=1#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:90fc2f41,vid:82mN5T5KV-A
>
>
>
> But… doesn’t that seem weird to you Will?  We read an FBI report that
> makes little sense and one is told one is a conspiracy theorist if one even
> asks the most glaringly obvious questions, in which case one is a
> conspiracy theorist without an actual theory.
>
>
>
> Notice that there is nothing political in any of that.  The victim here
> holds no office.  Granted he owns a pile of money, but so do the others in
> that neighborhood, and you can bet they have a well-thought out security
> system, and a well thought out nine millimeter beside the bed should those
> security measures fail.
>

It was obviously shady, man.  Lies abound. I just don't think it's a hill
worth dying on.  The story is dead in the water and you'd do well to give
up on it. Epstein is a far more important thread to pull on and people seem
to have largely forgotten that as well.  Pick your battles.

>…As for geopolitics, that's different.  Taiwan has a lot of defense itself
> and a lot of allies that will defend it…
>
>
>
> OK Will, you have my full and undivided with that one.  Is Taiwan assuming
> the USA will leap to her aid?  I fear she is, and if so what happens if the
> USA cannot come to her aid because we are out of money?
>
We will lose more money if Taiwan falls than we could possibly spend
defending it.

>…It is about 100x more important to the global economy than Ukraine, and
> to US/NATO hegemony, too…
>
>
>
> I agree there, but what if… we shot our wad on Ukraine and have nothing
> left to give?  What if no one buys those war bonds?  That almost caused the
> USA to give up in the war on Japan in 1945.
>

I'm sure we have a plan reserved for Taiwan.  Also, like every other
country would help.  I also think Russia would love the opportunity to turn
on China and take some of that territory, lest the opposite eventually
happen to itself.  Now that is a pair of tenuous allies.

…I think an invasion will result in the Fujian coast getting glassed to
> oblivion, and more.  It's a war of attrition that the CCP can't afford,
> especially with the fact that places like Xinjiang, Tibet, and Inner
> Mongolia are practically not even China anymore…
>
>
>
> So… are we at the point where we recognize the USA cannot afford a sea
> war, so we are hoping the nuclear deterrent will dissuade an increasingly
> desperate Xi hoping to not be deprived of his Dear Head by his own Dear
> People?  Oh dear.  The more we rely on the nuclear bomb as a weapon, the
> less effective it becomes as a deterrent.
>
Not nukes, conventional missiles owned by Taiwan.  I probably shouldn't
have used the term 'glassed'...just destroyed, rather.

>…That is coming for China.  The big reason it hasn't happened already is
> the nukes, I think…
>
>
>
> I think you are right on that, but I have the sobering thought of the day:
> one of the known hazards of the H Bomb was that we would eventually begin
> to think of it as a weapon of war rather than an unthinkable doomsday
> deterrent.  I have witnessed what feels like a steady erosion of military
> capability (in the form of uncontrollable government debt) which steadily
> increases reliance on nuclear weapons.  This is a bad thing.
>
People use the things they have, so I just assume it is an eventuality.
Hopefully a small tactical one or series of them, in battle and not on
civilians.  Maybe that would quell our nuke fever for a while.  I don't
really think MAD is legitimate but it's a good bluff.  But I do think a
country that nukes another will face conventional warfare from essentially
the rest of the world until it is taken over completely.  Except if the US
did it, then I think we might get nuked back if they can hit us.

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20221205/a2d65eec/attachment.htm>