Europe’s Migrant Crisis

The pouring of refugees from war torn countries into the West is creating a lot of angry groups and protests in the West.  Some countries in the West are beginning to refuse more refugees.  Some countries in the West have been refused any refugee from the beginning.  Yet the wars in the Middle East and elsewhere are still raging on.  If more wars are going to break out, we should see even more refugees seek migration toward the West.  How will the West handle even more refugees when the current refugee acceptance level is already intolerable?

By the way, I believe in the etiquette of common sense such as a guest should never rudely wreck a host’s home.  Thus I don’t think it’s right for refugees to refuse to assimilate into a host country, after all such a country is providing aid to the refugees.  Common sense also tells me that a host country should either accept the refugees with care or not accept any refugee, because doing anything else would just be egregiously inhuman.  Of course, the refugees should follow all laws and rules of a host country, because refugees should not have any crazy advantage and illegal leeway over regular citizens of the host country.  I think the host country should declare clear rules and regulations in accepting refugees and then enforce such means in decisive, humane and lawful manners.  By doing the right things right, we can bring peace toward all sides.  Sometimes though, it’s better to not do anything at all so an uglier mess won’t be forming.

Meanwhile, extremists who are using religions to brainwash people are only fueling more hatreds around the world.  In my opinion, if a religion which promotes killing and forcefully coerce people into a belief is not a real religion, more like a devil worship cult.  The things a legitimate religion should cherish most are love, compassion, peace, and relative moral values that fit with time.  Also, a religion should have no business in politics and government.

With science, a religion should be open minded about the advances of humankind.  When a religion makes science as an enemy, it’s when a religion is really sliding backward into time.  Such a religion isn’t belonging to the future of humankind, because progress of humankind should be the ultimate priority.  Only progress could we eventually save ourselves from true extinction.  We don’t want to become just like the dinosaurs who went extinct forever, because their fossils are the strongest warnings to us all.  Of course, nothing can outlast time, and so we can’t delude ourselves in believing that humankind will be forever lasted, but at least progress can stretch out the timeline of true extinction.  Without progress and in a nuclear age, I think we are setting ourselves up for hell on earth.  Thus, we don’t need more problems such as violent religions that coerce people into a belief.  What we need is more humankind progress in general — such as science and humankind civilities.

In my opinion, when a religion starts to coerce somebody into a belief, it’s when such a religion should be demoted to a dangerous cult.  We humans are not robots, because we have a brain to think.  We should be able to question a belief without being killed or persecuted in any harmful way.  As long we don’t go around and coerce people into our own belief, we should be able to question any belief in peaceful manner.  A civilization cannot be called a civilization when people are harming each other for one’s own belief.

I can only see more dead people walking when fake religions promote love through killing and hatreds.  Religion goes wrong can only fuel even more wars in this “already madly in love with wars” world.  Without further ado, check out the videos right after the break to see how the West has been coping with inundation of refugees.

 

 

Sticks and Stones

In nuclear age, some people tend to think numbers don’t matter, because one nuke can send millions and more to the grave.  Nonetheless, I can’t help but wonder what if all the nukes go off but fail to kill the very last couple thousands of human beings, because the last few ones are resilient as cockroaches.  This shows that number does matter.  With enough number, even all the nukes go off, some human beings will be able to carry on with sticks and stones.  These people will live, but they will suffer a hell that they wish they had never been born.  Perhaps, Einstein can be wrong in some mathematical equations, but he might be dead right on people who live through the next great war will have to use sticks and stones for their regiments.

I’ve always had this thought in the back of my head, and it keeps on telling me that nuclear winter is coming.  We have witnessed atomic bombs went off in WWII in Japan, and the devastation of these bombs left behind was godlike destruction.  According to https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006041224270, a single modern nuclear bomb such as hydrogen bomb can be 1000 times more powerful than an atomic bomb.  With this picture of how powerful a hydrogen bomb may be, do we really want to test to see Einstein is right about sticks and stones?  Although I think there will be some lucky souls that might survive the successive nuclear bomb attacks — they might have underground bunkers and whatnot that can resist nuclear bomb attacks — but I doubt that we would know for sure who could win in the battle of number versus nuclear weapon.

In WWI, people were convinced that peace would prevail as the twentieth century was young.  I had heard some people mentioned how people back then believed modern trades and business links would bring peace and prevail over war.  Unfortunately, they were so wrong as WWI broke out in July 28th of 1914.  Nowadays, some people are believing that the world is so interconnected by modern communications, transportations, financial connections, trade links, and whatnot that WWIII would be impossible.  These people may want to refresh their memory of WWI, because history can sometimes be a great teacher.

In my opinion, it’s not a conspiracy theory to think that WWIII might happen.  It takes only one rouge state with many friends that starts the attack on another state with many friends to have a WWIII started.  In fact, it might just be about one state is winning an economic battle against another state, and the state that is losing in the economic warfare would begin to lash out with military prowess.  In today world, I’m pretty sure that two big powerful states that got friends may very well start a WWIII easily.  Perhaps, smaller states that are friends of the superpowers would push the superpowers into WWIII.  If a superpower fails to protect a smaller state or giving a smaller state a sense of security, I don’t think such a superpower would be able to recruit more friends into her alliance structure.  Sure, a WWIII may also start out with proxy wars in smaller states, but the fire of WWIII may eventually engulf the whole world.

We know wars such as WWI, WWII, and possible WWIII are wars that require traditional military structures.  By this I meant the battlefield will be littered with as many weapons and soldiers as possible.  Nonetheless, I think WWIII will also see nontraditional battlefields.  How come?  The future war is going to be a war of unrestricted warfare tactics and strategies.  From guerrilla tactics to massive force blitzkrieg, all is going to be carried out in WWIII.  Of course, all of that may not be even mattered if states with nuclear weapons decide to empty their nuclear arsenals as much and as fast as possible.

Knowing the truth of how ugly a future world war would be, why would humans even think about playing a zero sum game?  Perhaps, we are humans, but we still have some ape DNA strands within us still.  Only animals (e.g., ape, whale, bird, etc…) know the trap is around the corner and yet they still head right into it.  Let’s hope Einstein will be very wrong on how humans will resort to sticks and stones for regiments, because otherwise it would be insane.

As Long Humans Won’t Go Insane, M.A.D. Still Matters For Some Time To Come

I’m a keyboard warrior, and here is my theory on what if U.S.A. and China would go to war against each other.  I’m not an expert in military weaponries and technologies, and so I’m not even going to try to be specific in details.  Read on to see what I got in mind.

Many people would think China would go to war with Philippines and Japan before they would attack U.S.A., and I think this is unlikely.  Only if Philippines and Japan provoke China in unbearable way, then China would attack these two countries.  Nonetheless, if I’m in charge of China, I would not think Philippines and Japan would dare to provoke and attack China first.  Thusly, I would only draw out secondary defensive plans, with care though, to address the what if Philippines and Japan attack China.  The primary plan which to address the priority would be going to war against U.S.A., because — at this point in human timeline — U.S.A. is the only foe in the world that would dare to truly challenge China right in the open, conventional or not.

Of course, in the between of everything, I don’t think China would be careless about little details, and so China would probably draw out plans to address diplomatic conundrums just so China could have an edge in world diplomacy.  Furthermore, China would want to make sure she knows who would side with U.S.A. when war truly breaks out between U.S.A. and herself.  Meanwhile, China is trying to scare Vietnam and her neighbors into submission, because this way China would get an idea of who will be against her for sure when war breaks out between U.S.A. and herself.  Vietnam is going to be capitulated between China and United States.  Simply put, Vietnam knows China will forever be her neighbor through geography, but she can use U.S.A. to push back against China when things get too ugly.  Other asian neighbors will think twice in challenging China, and so China would know of this too.

Russia would love to see China and U.S.A. go to war, because Russia wants to see two tigers on a mountain killing each other as she waits for her turn to swoop down and destroy both when the time and means are on her side.  Although it seems as if Russia is suffering consequences of economic sanctions and the turmoil in Ukraine, but Russia got time on her side to just wait things out.  Meanwhile, Russia is cozying up with China to leverage against U.S.A. and Europe in terms of military, diplomacy, energy, and economy.  Moreover, Russia would throw oil into the fire to flame things up between U.S.A. and China.  Thus, we will see Russia and China will strike even more deals in weapons, military, economics, and whatnot.

Europe is facing economic turmoils in several parts of her region.  I think China, Russia, and United States are befriending Europe on the surface but taking advantages of her underneath the surface.  After all, who could let go a bargain/deal or a momentous advantage in whatever, right?  Thus, we will see China, Russia, and the United States to partly be helpful but also partly be very unhelpful toward European countries in general.  Nonetheless, it’s possible that there are several European countries that aren’t expendable for military strategical reasons, thus we would see China, Russia and the United States fight for European friendships in this specific situation.  What military strategic reasons?  Don’t ask me, because Europe is a big place too, and so it’s obvious that Europe will have a role to play if a war between China and United States breaks out.

U.S.A. is trying to have her economy recovers from the recent financial crisis in 2008.  The recovery in the United States is truly slow, and so the United States does have her hands tie behind her back.  As China increases her military expenditures, the United States compels to spend money on keeping her military edge even though her economy is still not recovering.  China got Russia to supply some military technologies, but China is probably spending untold amount of money in research and development to develop her own in-house military technologies that would give her an edge over her foes.  Obviously, United States faces a difficulty in scaring China nowadays, because China is way stronger in terms of military and economics.  Thus we have seen China becomes more assertive in pushing United States out of the Pacific.  This way, China is going to have her own Monroe doctrine in the 21st century.  Of course, if United States refuses to allow China to have her own Monroe doctrine, China would probably do whatever she can to push United States out of the Pacific regardless.

China also got a backup plan to make sure her country isn’t too relying on the Pacific for energy and whatnot.  This is why we are seeing China proposes the modern Silk Road development.  This means China is creating a land route for her energy and trades just so in case she can circumvent the United States’ possible actions in the Pacific.  For an example, the United States can use her carrier fleet to blockade China from doing her normal operations in the Pacific, and this would hamper China’s trades and energy imports.  The Silk Road is like one arrow shoots two birds at the same time.  On one hand the Silk Road will boost the regional economies and in longer term would also keep China’s economy strong, and on the other hand the Silk Road would allow China to develop a second route to circumvent the possible Pacific blockades from her foes.

I can go on, but I’m just a keyboard warrior, and so let me summarize things up.  I conclude that if the United States will not allow China to have her own Monroe doctrine, China would do just about anything to push the United States out of the Pacific regardless.  I don’t see how China would allow the United States to contain her as she soars higher and higher.  Meanwhile, the United States has her plate full, but she probably tries to contain China regardless.  This will lead to the faster development of China’s modern Silk Road.  Furthermore, we will see Russia and China team up even more closely.  In this way, China/Russia alliance will try to win even more friends.  With both powerful countries (i.e., China and Russia) together they are more convincing this way in winning friends.  Basically, China and Russia are trying hard to isolate the United States in all fronts before a real war would break out.  Of course, things won’t go as plan if the United States or China decide to back down for world peace.  Nonetheless, I don’t know if there is any will in either China or the United States for backing down.  Sure, we still got M.A.D. to prevent an all out war such as a new World War (i.e., WWIII), but humans are capable of going insane.

World Conflicts Are Not That Simple!

In this day and age, 21st Century to be exact, conflicts around the world are never going to be simple.  Heck, even in the ancient time, the conflicts then were not so simple.  Now, we have so many countries that are doing overlapping business, because there is so called a chain of supply this and that.  For an example, United States imports from China most, China relies on neighbors and far West for technology and raw materials to produce stuffs for United States, and countries such as Australia love to sell energy products to China to support the supply chains in China.  Obviously, the example I mentioned is to be simplistic, because China is not only exporting goods to United States, but China is exporting to the whole world at large.  United States is obviously not only importing from China, but United States is importing from the whole world at large.  Still, the whole world is importing from China most!  The last sentence does implicit a weakness of globalization.  It begs the question what if China’s supply chains are in trouble, what will the implications be for the world’s economics at large.  It’s not so simple to just say that my country will become self sufficient immediately.  Any country can’t just magically wave a wand in the air, and then the technology and infrastructure and various vocations of expertise — that take decades to build — suddenly and magically materialize for whatever production purposes.  The complexity of the world nowadays begs the question that even small conflict can put any country which depends on the world’s economics in a very uncomfortable position, especially in economics sense.

I think one thing people fail to realize is that nuclear factor is even more important as a war deterrent for world peace than ever before.  Although some of us probably have wished that humankind should have never been able to figure out the nuclear technology, thus nuclear would never have existed.  Nonetheless, such wish is rather foolish since nuclear age has been here for a while already.  This is why nuclear weapons have been employed by various countries for deterrent purposes.  Nuclear weapons are not a figment of the imagination for a long time already!!!  Countries that have nuclear weapons know this, thus these countries use nuclear weapons as war deterrent strategic maneuver.  It’s a very effective war deterrent strategy indeed!  With this knowledge, we can see that United States, China, India, Pakistan, Russia, UK, France, Israel, and North Korea cannot be invaded outright.  The big three countries that for sure cannot be invaded outright are United States, China, and Russia.  Why these three countries have the power to fully destabilize the world or prolong the world peace?  Simply put, their military, economic, and world influence mights ensure their power to dictate world order!  Smaller countries, with nuclear technology or not, cannot compete or go head to head with United States, China, and Russia.  Of course, there is always something that is not on people’s mind and yet will be the exception of whatever rigid order.  In today’s world balance, for United States, China, and Russia to go to war against one another, the exceptional culprit behind this global catastrophe would be a psychopath with powerful positions that can manipulate a country’s foreign policy.

Although the big three in the world will not wage war against one another outright, but they can definitely use their smaller allies to wage proxy wars.  This is why we, people with brain, know that small conflicts around the world might not be so simple.  I can safely assume that all conflicts nowadays are a sort of game for the big three to push and pull against one another, and so in the end of the day the winners will always be the big three!  In short term though, the players who gain something in whatever conflict that the big three are manipulating can also be said that they’re the winners, too.  Nonetheless, in the end of the day, they might not be the ultimate winners!  This is why, I think we, the people of the world, should be more informed, open minded, and less judgmental, and only in this way we can see the events that break out around the world with clearer sense.

In conclusion, United States, China, and Russia know they will not benefit in an all out war, but they’re more profitable in term of controlling the events of the world.  This is why I think the ongoing chaos in East and South China seas, Ukraine, and the Middle East are small events that will dictate the world influence of the big three!  In these events, the big three cannot claim their innocent!  Nonetheless, the big three are acting in their own interest, because the big three after all have to lookout for their own people.  It’s just unfortunate that the smaller players in the world stage have to be manipulated by the big three!  Of course, nobody knows how the world map will look like in the future, thus we can never say that the big three we have now will be the big three of 300 years later.  Remember Roman Empire?  Remember how big they were in ancient time?  If I’m not wrong, they’re no longer here since AD 476.  That’s a long time ago.  Let just say that, the big three are not invulnerable, but at the moment and years to come, these are the players that make the world spins.  At the moment, Ukraine crisis is just another event that the big three are positioning themselves for their own future!  Unfortunately, the West and Ukraine itself will have to be manipulated by the big three!  Russia is looking to gain the most in Ukraine crisis, and Russia does have the popular vote as Crimea’s people are voting for Russia.  China is not yet making a hard stand for Ukraine crisis since it’s playing a waiting game.  Meanwhile, United States is anxiously preventing Russia from annexing Crimea.  Who’s right?  Who’s wrong?  It’s hard to tell, because the big three are never innocent!  Nonetheless, I hope after Ukraine crisis, the world will be more peaceful, however Ukraine crisis will turn out to be!  Let’s not see someone is so stupid enough to push for World War III, OK?  As Albert Einstein had said something along this line, he knew we will have to use nuclear weapons in World War III, but he suggested that we might fight with sticks and stones in World War IV.  It’s a long conclusion, I know!

Peace Is A Fool, And Einstein Is Forever Wise

I’d just written another poetry, and this one is rather gloomy.  I hope whoever reads this won’t mind.

  • Peace could have been the only king in town,
  • but humankind decided chaos should be the alternative,
  • therefore we created swords to kill,
  • therefore we devised tortures to interrogate,
  • therefore we had heroes and villains.
  • Peace could have been the only voice in town,
  • but humankind detested a boring, quiet town,
  • therefore we started small wars to liven up the town,
  • therefore we propagandized to divide brother among brother,
  • therefore we stroke the beast of hatreds.
  • It was fine that peace was challenged by chaos,
  • as men only had stick and stones,
  • whence men got their sharp metal swords,
  • then peace thought that this was hell on earth,
  • men died in droves just so peace would lose the day.
  • Peace lost the grasp of earthly control,
  • and thought that things could not be worse,
  • how wrong could peace have been,
  • as that thought was completely put to shame by devious men,
  • they had abandoned their sharp metal swords for nuclear bombs.
  • Whence men got their sharp metal swords,
  • they did not hesitate to wage war with sharp pointed blades,
  • now they got their nuclear bombs,
  • peace would be naive to think that men would think otherwise,
  • peace would be naive to think men would be logical.
  • Among men there were few wise ones,
  • among wise ones there was Albert Einstein,
  • but he could no longer walk among the livings,
  • nonetheless, he was the father of nuclear bombs,
  • yet he had warned men might go from nuclear to stick and stones.
  • Only the fools would doubt the wise men’s words,
  • therefore I would not doubt Einstein’s sticks and stones prediction,
  • and so you should not too,
  • but peace would be peace,
  • continually be naive for thinking that chaos could be contained in a nuclear age.
  • Whence peace got too comfortable,
  • it was when wars broke out,
  • chaos ran amuck,
  • men died in droves,
  • just so peace would remember how evil chaos was.
  • Fools with name such as Hitler came upon the scene,
  • just to show how wrong peace could be,
  • and yet peace would never learn,
  • continually, naively, went about without a care,
  • to think that chaos was only a conspirator.
  • If chaos was only merely a conspirator,
  • peace would forever be the only king of the town,
  • nonetheless, chaos had proven that peace was merely a fool,
  • to believe the lies chaos spew,
  • it was on you peace, and so chaos ruled.
  • Einstein’s words might be buried among the ruins,
  • but whence men got only sticks and stones,
  • it would be too late to turn back time,
  • for time would not have any patience, ever,
  • time would not wait on peace to rein in chaos.
  • Peace is a fool,
  • and Einstein is forever wise!

Can Cyberwar Be More Damaging Than Wars That Require Weapons And Dead Bodies?

As United States and China carry out actions to beef up each own cyber security, many of us might not understand why the two countries have done so!  Even I’m not sure why, but I think I know.  I think that more governments are signed up to the idea of securing a nation’s cyber security with one thing in mind, it’s that to protect their digital integrity!

Imagine, one nation can hack into another nation digital infrastructure so the activity of rendering one’s nation banking and intelligence systems useless, the whole idea in itself is scaring the heck out of each nation.  I think by now, it’s a known fact that many nations are using the digital world to formulate all types of plans such as monitoring the intentions of the enemy!  Without staying ahead of one another, how one nation knows that its intelligence has the right information to keep its nation safe?

Albeit, physical destruction has to be the last resort, but before such measure to be carried out, I think many nations of the world will try to outmaneuver one another through the medium of Internet.  Perhaps, the Internet may be up for a consideration of total control, and who shall control the Internet?  In the meantime, more and more news are reporting about group after group of hackers have successfully penetrated and compromised important entities.  United States has had seen so much hacking activities came from China, and China denies all of that.  In return, China says that she herself is also a target of hackers.

Cnet is reporting president Obama has laid out cyberwar guidelines.  The article isn’t thorough at all, but it does point out one interesting aspect as to increase cyberwar effort.  So, I guess we are going to see a trend of evermore unrest in the digital world, whether that be coming from China or U.S. or any other country that wants to participate in the cyber conflict.  So the question is, can cyberwar be more damaging than wars that require weapons and dead bodies?