➡ The text discusses potential conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, with Israel and America possibly attacking Iran, and NATO getting involved in Ukraine. It also mentions potential civil unrest in Europe and America, and possible American aggression towards Venezuela. The text suggests these events could lead to global political upheaval and possibly revolutions. The speaker, Professor Zhang, predicts these events could occur within the next five years.
➡ A meeting is being called to prepare the military for a potential conflict. This meeting is not only a public display but also a chance for behind-the-scenes discussions. The military, now a bureaucracy, is expected to follow orders despite potential negative impacts. The motivation for potential conflict with Iran could be to reassert American dominance, control trade routes, or fulfill a long-standing plan to make Israel the dominant power in the Middle East.
➡ The writer expresses gratitude for the support and interest in their geopolitical essays and discussions. Despite feeling unwell, they enjoyed the conversation and look forward to future interactions. They also mention their fan base in China and encourage support for their channel through purchases of survival gear from their website, offering a discount code for savings. They end with a reminder that preparation is key to thriving in challenging situations.
➡ The text discusses various religious beliefs about the end of the world, including the return of Jesus or the Messiah, and the destruction of the Al Aqsa Mosque. It also mentions a potential war with Iran and the role of Islam, Putin, and the Orthodox Church as perceived enemies. The text further delves into conspiracy theories, such as the significance of the number 33 in Freemasonry and its alleged connection to certain events. Lastly, it suggests that these events and plans are intentionally made obvious to the public, a concept referred to as the “revelation of method.”
➡ The text discusses the potential political and military strategies of the United States, Russia, China, and Iran. It suggests that the U.S. might invade Iran, but this could be a trap as Iran’s terrain makes it difficult to occupy. The text also speculates that Iran might respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical choke point for global oil supply. Lastly, it predicts a possible agreement between the U.S. and China, with the U.S. making concessions to China in exchange for China’s non-interference in Iran.
➡ The text discusses the shifting dynamics of global power, focusing on the relationship between the United States, China, and Russia. It suggests that China, despite its lack of a blue water navy, is becoming a significant global player due to its investment in global trade and its desire to act as a peacemaker in international conflicts. The text also highlights the potential for a shift in power if Russia gains control over Ukraine and aligns with China and Iran, which could challenge the dominance of the US and its naval power. However, the text also notes the potential for conflict between these nations and the potential impact on the US economy if its dominance is challenged.
➡ The U.S. is seen as a safe place to invest due to its perceived stability and geographical strengths. However, there are concerns about potential instability and corruption, with some predicting a possible default on U.S. debt. This has led to a global shift towards investing in gold, particularly in China, where people are becoming more reluctant to buy U.S. dollars due to geopolitical uncertainties. There are also fears that the U.S. could descend into civil conflict, with some suggesting that the elite may use strategies such as creating an external enemy or instigating civil war to divert attention from domestic issues.
➡ The text discusses a hypothetical war scenario from Putin’s perspective. It suggests that Putin believes he can win the war not by traditional means, but by exploiting the fragility of European governments and the lack of public support for the war. The text also discusses the potential for a nationalist resurgence in Europe, which could be harnessed for war, and Putin’s potential strategy of positioning the Americans as the real enemy to the Europeans.
➡ A man who grew up in Canada but has lived in China for 30 years shares his experience of returning to Canada with his children. He was shocked by the strict social rules and the incident where his son was taken by strangers in a park due to perceived neglect. The man was then pressured by the police to take his son to the hospital, even though the child was fine. He feels this incident reflects an over-bureaucratization of society, where compliance is prioritized over common sense and individual rights.
➡ The speaker discusses the differences between disaster preparedness in China and Canada. They argue that Chinese people are more prepared for disasters due to their emphasis on community and family, while Canadians rely more on government assistance. They also express concern about the potential misuse of social media data by authorities, and the potential for this to incite civil unrest. They urge people to be cautious about what they share online and to focus on building strong community ties for disaster preparedness.
➡ The discussion revolves around China’s stance on national sovereignty and its potential reactions to threats against it. The speaker suggests that China would likely respond to any infringement on its territory, such as Taiwan, Tibet, or Xinjiang, with military action. However, they believe that China would prefer to use economic blockades rather than direct military invasion. The speaker also predicts that China will focus on promoting peace and prosperity globally, using its economic influence to negotiate peace in conflict areas.

These people are deadly serious. They have this plan for the past 20 years of going to the Middle east and just destroying that region and making Israel the dominant power in that region. There’s only one more power left, and that’s Iran. I’m expecting within the next week or two weeks for Israel to resume airstrikes against Iran. And eventually I think this will culminate American ground invasion. This will allow Putin to consolidate his grip over Ukraine and Europe. You come to China. No one’s talking about a war between China and Taiwan. It’s a Pentagon promoting the idea of a war because the Pentagon is always looking to justify its existence.

The military has become a bureaucracy, Peg said, and Trump will send a signal which is play ball or you will be purged. It’s that simple. No matter how you analyze it, the groundwork is being laid for a massive campaign somewhere. This is unprecedented. This is a major signal that something big is happening. America is a Ponzi scheme. It’s either, you know, your entire economy collapses or you fight these wars. And so they’re going to fight these wars. World War Three is already happening. This is a house of cards and it is in the process of collapsing right now.

You’re going to see an economic cray the likes of which we’ve never seen. Hi folks, Canadian prepper here. Today on the channel I’m joined by the one and only Professor Zhang from the Predictive History YouTube channel. He’s a Beijing based educator, Yale educated, and his secret history and geostrategy lectures have drawn a massive audience. His videos recently going viral has a lot of Momentum here on YouTube and it’s a honor to talk to him today. I know you see things through the rubric of game theory and I’m wondering if maybe you could give us the high level view of.

Of what? Where you see things going in terms of geopolitical calamity. Are we heading into World War Three? What does that look like to you and how do we understand that through the prism of game theory? Sure. So it’s great on your show and again, I’ve been watching your show for quite a number of years now, so I really appreciate analysis. I really agree with you on many, many viewpoints about the world today. So I think the next five years there’ll be two major flashpoints in the world. The first will be the Middle east, of course.

I’m expecting within the next week or two weeks for Israel to launch to resume airstrikes against Iran. And in round two, we expect that the flooding will be Much more sustained, much more gears, and eventually I think this will culminate in the ground invasion, American ground invasion of Iran. So I think that is one major flashpoint that will be consistent the next five years and something that we must watch very, very closely. The second flash point, of course, is Ukraine. NATO will slowly be drawn into Ukraine. Quite honestly, NATO has been fighting Russia for the past three years.

So even though it is Ukrainian troops, it’s still NATO financing, NATO weaponry, NATO targeting, NATO intelligence, NATO special forces. So it’s basically NATO without the ground troops. But I think that as these, as the Ukrainian front lines continues to dwindle, NATO will have no choice but to reinforce the front lines with ground troops. I think the combination of the war will be Odessa. I think that if you just look at current trends, the elections in Moldova, which we can talk about, the threats against Kaliningrad, and the possibility of besieging Transnatria, I think the conflict will culminate in Odessa.

I think that what will happen is that the Russians will encircle Odessa and force NATO to reinforce Odessa, and Odessa will become NATO’s Stalingrad. I think NATO will lose in Odessa. What’s really important is the repercussions of these two flashpoints. So I think that as this war in Iran decreases, continues to ramp up, Israel will be more extreme in its behavior. So one thing that we should look out for is a possibility that the Al Aqsaq Mosque in Jerusalem will be destroyed. Now, as you know, the Al Azer Mosque is the third holiest site in Islam.

And if it is destroyed in order to make way for the. For the building of the Third Temple, then we can see massive discontent throughout the Islamic world. And this may cause actually revolutions within the Islamic world. Places like Jordan are particularly vulnerable to a revolution right now. This war in Ukraine could also create civil conflict in Europe as well. The governments in France, in Britain are extremely fragile and vulnerable right now. There’s extreme economic discontent in these nations. People are now protesting mass immigration. So if there’s a draft, then we can expect that the young people would rebel against the draft.

And this would cause tremendous civil conflict within Europe and also in Americas. We can see that America is becoming more and more aggressive. So we can expect America to eventually organized airstrikes against Venezuela with the intention of toppling the regime. So I think it’s very simple for America to place the regime in Venezuela. The regime is very unpopular. There’s tremendous economic inequality in Venezuela. America is still the world’s most powerful military. But the problem is that if you do this to Venezuela, then all South America is going to react negatively to it. America lose its soft power, it loses its legitimacy.

You can see massive discontent arise in South America against American hegemony. You know, the American empire, I mean, its main tool for management is soft power, it’s legitimacy. And if it loses its legitimacy, if it loses authority, then it’s going to be very hard for the American empire to sustain itself. So I think these are the two major flashpoints that we’re going to see, Odessa and Iran. And I think that these two flashpoints will cause like a political earthquake throughout the world that may culminate in civil conflict and possibly revolutions as well. So that’s how I see the world in the next five years.

Well, that’s pretty high level. We haven’t really touched on Taiwan, but we’ll, we don’t want to over complicate things here. So with respect to Iran then, apparently the news just came in that there was more fading deployments, another four launchers. Yes. And so to me, that’s kind of the setup. And you have all this tanker activity Right now, these KC135s flying around Europe. But I think that’s what we seen prior to, you know, we’ve seen a lot of signaling and misdirection prior to the last Iranian attack, attack on Iran. So what makes you think that it’s going to be in the next few weeks? I mean, today Trump and Netanyahu came out and said, hey, we got this.

It’s going to be eternal peace in the Middle East. They’re saying, so problem solved. Right. Isn’t this, isn’t the situation resolved now as a result of this? Right. So first of all, we have to be very suspicious what Trump and I will say, right? Because yeah, I’m being just so for the record, everybody knows. Yeah. Sarcasm. Yeah. Right. So, you know, right before Trump attacked Iran, there was peace negotiations, Right. So it’s almost like they caught Iran off guard or they were taking advantage of Iran. So I think that, you know, right before they strike, they want to present an image as a peacemaker.

And I don’t know why they do this. Maybe it’s because it’s a joke. You know, maybe they think it’s really funny that they do this. They have all these inside jokes among them. I mean, it’s really occult what they do, but the signs are pretty obvious. So student signs is that Iran themselves have come up and said that they expect to be attacked within the next week. Russia Pass, the news agency have said that they expect Iran to be, to be attacked. Recently, Iran has returned, has paid off all its outstanding obligations to imf. So it’s performed, obviously, debt has been clear.

Iran was removed from a swift system. And as you say, there’s all this military buildup. So I just feel like all these things are just massive signals to us that an attack is being prepared. And I think the last step is for Trump to meet with his generals, which is expected sometime this week. I’m not sure what the date is, but, you know, actually. Okay, tomorrow. But this, yeah, our tomorrow. Your today. Right, so September 30th. So, so, so we, so as you, as you said many times, this is unprecedented and this is a major signal that something big is happening.

Now, there have been different rumors. There’s rumors of a purge because, you know, the military is top heavy. You’ve got like 44 star generals for about 1.32 million combat soldiers. That’s just ridiculous. So you can expect downsizing. But there’s also rumors that these officers, these generals, will have to swear loyalty to Trump rather than Constitution. I don’t think that’s likely, but it’s also possible. But I think that no matter how you analyze it, the groundwork is being laid for a massive campaign somewhere. Maybe it’s Venezuela, maybe it’s Iran. I expect both places actually. But, but I think, I think they’re calling for the meeting because they want to prepare the military bureaucracy for a conflict.

Yeah, it seems, because, I mean, there have been big wars in the past where they didn’t call all the generals, you know, like Vietnam, you know, I’m sure the Korean War, the, the Iraq War. And I don’t think it’s historically precedented to call all of your generals into one place. Place they’re going to, I think, put on a, a public show. But I think there’s also going to be obviously something that happens behind the scenes that we don’t see. And whatever is discussed at that meeting, I think will is really the, the pith of what, what is going on there.

Well, well, I think that hex and trouble send a signal which is play ball or you will be purged. It’s that simple. So I think that what people don’t appreciate is that the military has become a bureaucracy and these are bureaucrats who are interested in meeting their privileges and so they’re going to play along. So even though in their hearts they know that attacking Iran or Venezuela will be detrimental to the American republic and to the American military, they’re still going to play along, because they’re bureaucrats and they’re interested in meeting their privileges, and that’s what Trump understands about the mentality of bureaucracy today.

And do you think they’re like, what is the benefit, though, in bringing them together? Like, is there some sort of psychology at work there to have everybody in the same room? Is there, like a group think or social conformity bias or something that they’re going for? Because it seems like if that’s what they were doing, they could do that in isolation with emails and, you know, through virtual means. Yeah, that’s a great. Yeah, that’s a good question. So I’m not sure if you’ve seen Trump show the Apprentice. Remember how at the end of the show, like.

Like at the end of every show, there’s this big meeting, big boardroom meeting, where all the contestants come into the boardroom and everyone’s afraid of being fired, right? And Trump’s trademark line is, you’re fired. So it’s like the Hunger Games, right? You got this 44 star general. They’re all invested in maintaining their privileges. So whoever’s most enthusiastic, whoever’s most willing to go along to follow Trump’s orders, will be promoted and everyone else will be purged. So, so, so, so that’s the mentality here. That’s why you want to have this meeting. It’s a. It’s a giant game show.

So, as you say, for the public, it’s a show of unity, it’s show of force, but behind the scenes, it’s a purge. It’s, you know, if you don’t do what Trump tells you, you’ll be fired. Right. And so why do you think they’re so obsessed with Iran? And a lot of these questions I’m going to be asking you, because sometimes I like to just kind of dumb myself down, pretend like I don’t know anything to really kind of get the perspective of the person I’m interviewing. So what do you think is their motivation for Iran? Do you believe that the last strike, as many experts are claiming, was unsuccessful on the Fordow facility, and they’re genuinely concerned about Iran being a threshold nuclear state? Is it strictly about oil? Is it about regional dominance? Is it about China and the fact that China is heavily reliant on oil from Iran? What do you think the main motivation for Iran is? So I think that there are dozens of reasons why they’re doing this, but I would just highlight the three main reasons.

The first main reason is in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. What I mean by that is the American empire, its power comes from the perception that it is the greatest military in the world that is able to defeat all opponents. And after the fall of the Soviet Union, that was very much true. And, and that’s why people invested in America. That’s why they bought the petrodollar. They had no choice in the matter, because if you didn’t do this, you can play along. America could come and invade you. But after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, people now have a sense that this is new power on the block.

There’s this new kid on the block who’s just as powerful. He might be younger, he might be smaller, but he’s really, really aggressive. And so the bully, you know, the, the, the head, he must demonstrate to everyone that he still got it. So, so going up, going and bombing Iran, you know, bombing to submission, destroying a country, it’s a signal to the rest of the world, I’m still a hegemon, okay? So I think that’s the main reason. Another reason is if you look at a map of Iran, it control, it is the center of the world in terms of trade.

And if you look at all these proposed trade alliances. So for example, China has Golden Road, Russia has something called the North South Corridor. You look at all these trade routes, it all goes through Iran. So you’re able to control Iran, you’re able to control all trade. And historically, that’s a source of Empire’s power, the ability to collect tolls on trade routes. So that’s the second reason. The third reason is eschatological. All right, so I might need something, some time to explain this, but go back to 9 11. After 9 11, Wesley Clark was a general.

He told Ed Goodman on, on, on stage that he then received secret confidential plans about America’s plans after 9 11. And the plan was to go to Middle east and basically destroy every single country. There were six different countries on the list. They destroyed six. There’s one country on the list. There’s one last country on the list, and it’s Iran. So I don’t. So there’s no way. There’s really no explanation why they have to do this, but it seems they’ve had this plan for the past 20 years of going the Middle east and just destroying that region and making Israel the dominant power in that region.

And there’s only one more power left, and that’s Iran. So I feel as though they feel that they invested so much 20 years and they’re so close to finish line. And Iran is the last boss in this video game they’re playing, like, who knows, but they want to finish it. So then the question is, why are they doing this? And as I say, it’s eschatological, it’s religious. So there are certain religious factions in America, I’ll just name it. These are the Christian Zionists, the vegetable Christians, you have the Mormons, you have extremist Jews, you have the Freemasons, because you have these different religious factions that are control of the national security apparatus in America.

They control the CIA, the FBI, they control the military. I mean, these are extremely powerful people. And in their vision of eschatology, and they believe that by. If they’re able to work out student events, if they are able to create a World War 3, they make Jerusalem the capital of the world. This will bring about the second Coming, the return of Jesus. There are different var. Do you think that, do you think, though, that these elites, is that just something they leverage? Like, is that just something that they. Do they genuinely believe that or do they just pretend to believe that so that they can get the support of their, their followers? You know, that is a great question.

And this someone I’ve been wrestling with for many, many years now, and I’ve been doing a lot of research and I just, I have to say this, but unfortunately, they really do believe this. And the root of this goes back to the British Empire. You go to the 17th century. This idea of Christian Zionism, what’s happening in the Middle east, this was all conceived, developed, scripted by Isaac Newton in his secret societies, the freemasons, in the 17th century. And, and why this is important is eventually Freemasons came over to America and they built the American empire in order to achieve this eschatological vision.

So I understand this sounds crazy and it doesn’t make any sense, but if you actually do the research, then you recognize that these people are deadly serious. And there’s really no other explanation except that they really believe. What, what, what they believe? What do they, what do they think they’re going to get out of this Second Coming? Like, do they think they’re going to be adorned with a better seat at the, at the eternal table? Or like, what is the. Well, so different religious sects have different beliefs. Okay, so you look at the Freemasons, they want to create the messaging age because they want to create a world government.

They want to create heaven on earth, they want to negate a possibility of heaven. They just want to create a world government. Okay, so that’s the Freemasons. And now, of course, Sorry, I’m simplifying this for the audience. Okay. It’s much more complicated than that, but that’s a. Freemasons. And you have the Evangelical Christians, the Christian Zionists. They believe that the second coming, Jesus will return and there’ll be a rapture. So they’ll all be, you know, ascended to heaven, and then Jesus will convert the Jews to Christianity, and this will usher in a thousand years of peace before the last Judgment.

Right. Then you have the Jews, these religious extremist Jews. They believe that Jesus will not return because they don’t believe in Jesus. But the Messiah will come at a time of need, and he will enslave the Christians and he will make Israel the dominant power in the world. All power will be centered in Jerusalem. So these are the three major steps. You have the Mormons as well. So they believe different things. Okay. But they all want the same result, which is to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and make Jerusalem the world capital and usher in World War three.

Those are. Islam is a hint, is a hindrance to this plan. It’s an obstacle. Right. So Islam would be the Antichrist in this scenario. Right. So there are different enemies that this world government and based in Judaism would face. Islam would be one enemy, but also Putin and the Orthodox Church would be another enemy. And these are the two major enemies that they were confront at the end of days. And so this is like the Gog versus Magog. Yeah, Right, right. It’s a war, a war against the Antichrist as well. So. So. So again, different traditions will have will conceive Gotham or got differently.

The Antichrist differently. But they all want the same things, which is the destruction of the Al Aqsa Mosque, a world war, and the building of the Third Temple. And just so people are clear, like you’re speaking to this from the perspective of an academic who. Like an empiricist who I. I don’t think. Are you religious yourself? I. I’m not religious. Right, so you’re kind of looking at this from the perspective of an outsider to try to understand what’s going on. Yes, I’m very much trying to figure out what’s going on. And the more I look, the more sort of confused I become.

And I’m trying to make sense of what’s going on, but this is just the broad picture of, of, of the religious beliefs. And so we have a big war with Iran coming. What are the implications going to be? Because it does seem like when you look at this, Charlie Kirk stuff. I’m not sure how much you follow that, but culturally, and maybe it’s just happen stance for the military industrial complex. But how convenient is it that all of a sudden there’s military in the streets ready to go in the United States to quell all the protests? They basically outlawed protesting that they’re going to sweep under the umbrella of leftists.

So if you’re anti war, if you’re protesting this war, you’re going to be, you know, caught up in that dragnet. You got military in the streets in a variety of different forms. People are being conditioned to watch people get arrested, even if they are illegal immigrants. You know, you’re getting conditioned to. To think that’s normal, Right. To have guys with full automatics out there arresting people, whether for good or bad. I’m just saying, you know, that’s what you’re being primed to accept. And now you have this Charlie Kirk thing where they’re opening all these chapters. They’re going to use his turning points as a recruitment tool.

And it’s got these religious undertones. I mean, it’s really perfect. Like it, it’s. How perfect is that, that they’re now about to go into this war? Like it seems a little too coincidental. Yeah. So again, I think there’s a script in place and they’re following the script to the letter. And I completely agree with you about Charlie Kirk and how committed it was for their plans. But there’s something about the Charlie Kirk assassination that’s really important for your viewers to understand, and that there’s this occult religious element to the assassination that people don’t really appreciate. So the number 33 is really important in Freemasonry.

It’s a divine number. So the highest rank you can achieve in freemasonry is. Is 33. The 33rd degree. Now, let’s look at how this applies to a Charlie Kirk assassination. So the Charlie Kirk assassination happened on September 10, which is 33 weeks after the inauguration of Donald Trump. Okay? The press conference, the FAA press conference where they announced they captured Tyler Robinson lasted 33 minutes, okay? And they announced that the Tyler Robinson was arrested after 33 hours. And they repeated this number 33 hours after the assassination. Charlie Cook Kirk was going to turn 3234 days after September 10th.

Now, if you go back and look at the picture of Charlie Cook Kirk when he was sitting there and talking to people, right beside him on the table were three hats, okay? Three white hats with number 47. Okay? 44 plus 7 is 11. 11 times 3 is 33. Again, go back and look at, like, Charlie Kirk sitting there right before the assassination. There were three white hats right beside him on the table. Now, 47, of course, is Donald Trump’s. You know, he’s a 47 president of the United States. But that’s not a coincidence. Right. Four plus seven is 11.

Three hats, that’s 33. So in my opinion, if you just look at religious history, this will be classified as a ritual sacrifice. So. And the point of a ritual sacrifice, of course, is to energize and galvanize the followers for the tribulations ahead, which is, you know, the wars that are coming. Yeah, it is an interesting number, isn’t it? I mean, it seems to, you know, there’s that old thing, it’s like kind of confirmation bias, they say sometimes, where people will say, well, I see the same time on the clock all the time. But when you think about how many times you look at the clock and don’t see it.

But with 33, it’s an exceptionally unusual number. I mean, it’s just present in so many places, whether it’s the NATO, that there’s now 32 members of NATO. And the 33rd, presumably, would probably be Ukraine or maybe Moldova. But how coincidental is that, that, you know, they’ve timed it so that this. You’re right on the fringes of, you know, a major global calamity and. Or even, like, you know, the 33 Liberty street with where. Where they hold all the gold. So, yeah, there’s definitely something to that numerology. I don’t know if it’s. It might be a little bit of a stretch, but like you say, you know, maybe it’s an inside joke to them.

Maybe it’s. If you’re that well off and you can do anything and anyone and you can go anywhere and buy anything, you’d probably get a little bored and you’d want to, you know, spice it up a little bit. Right. So maybe there is an element of that where they. It’s almost like. It’s like a sadist tendency to. To want to kind of play with your food, I guess. Yeah. So I think that we are at that level, we have that much power and wealth. I think you tend to be very superstitious and you’re going to do as much as you can to ensure that whatever plan you have works out properly.

So I think that there are some astrological elements to their plans. So, I mean, I think they’re superstitious and I think they’re Very much concerned about aligning stars in a way that allows them to achieve their plans. Another thing I will point out is how obvious all this is, right? So I mean, if you’re just a regular person, you’re watching the news, you’re like, wait a minute here. The FBI story does not make any sense. And these text messages between Tyler Robertson and his roommate, it’s installing my intelligence. That guy, the guy’s a zoomer. I mean, he’s.

And he was texting. They don’t write like that, okay? So there’s like tons and tons of evidence that demonstrate that the FBI story, the official story, is false. But what you need to understand is that’s part of the plan. It’s something that they call revelation of method. So the idea here is that these two are very superstitious and they think that what they’re doing is, is divine. But at the same time they’re very legalistic in that they want to maintain as strategies. I mean, they want to be able at the end of days to stand before Jesus and God and argue their case.

And if people are like, you know, like, they destroyed the world and we got here because of their sadistic psychopathic tendencies, then Jesus is going to punish them, right? But then they turn to teach us and say, no, no, no, the people were complicit in all this because the evidence that we planned this was so preponderous, so abundant that they had to fool themselves into believing otherwise. Because you look at 9, 11, you look at JFK, the evidence is. There’s a proponence of evidence. If you just look at it just objectively and just like, did you look at the evidence slightly, you’ll know that it was Paul plan, right? So they’re.

Meaning that they’re meeting that loophole, you know, it’s almost like a fine print in a contract, right? So like, the evidence is presented to you in such a way that like, you know that this is all planned and you just say, well, I didn’t know then. You are complicit in the act. It’s like that old superstition of, you know, you have to invite the devil in. Well, this, this conversation has definitely veered off where I thought it would, but it’s interesting stuff nonetheless because I think, you know, this, this is the big question, right? Is like, why are they doing this when they have so much power and control? And I think looking at it strictly from a game theory point of view, they probably think it’s a zero sum game and that if they don’t take it.

That power vacuum will be absorbed by somebody else. And that, I agree with you, that Iran is really the last on the list. I mean, they’ve been boldened by Syria, by, it looks like Lebanon is pretty much pacified, Hamas is on its final running on fumes, and this is really the end. So I guess the question is, how do you think China and Russia are going to react to this? Are they going to assist Iran in a way which will allow them to endure this upcoming onslaught, or is the country going to be destroyed? So, you know, in mid August, Putin met with Trump in Alaska, and it seemed as though there was no progress in the Ukraine war.

You know, like, so after, after the meeting, you have these, you know, deployment against Venezuela, you have Trump allowing for more weapons shipments to Ukraine. So it seemed as though that meeting was for naught. It was just a pointless meeting. But I mean, if you switch perspective and say, okay, what if it wasn’t about Ukraine, but what if it was about Iran? Right? Let’s just say hypothetically, we don’t know, but the agreement was actually for that. The agreement was that Trump could invade Iran and Putin would not interfere. Now, why would Putin agree to that deal? Because Iran is almost impossible for America to invade.

We’re so used to 2003, the Iraq war, when shock and awe, America just went in and just blew everything up. And then within a week, the war is over. The problem is that Iran is all mountainous and it’s a huge country, maybe three times the size of Iraq. So the problem is that America does not have the capacity to go invade Iran and occupy it properly. And I think that the American military will implode, will collapse in Iran, not because Iran will defeat America militarily, but mainly because America doesn’t have the logistic capacity to fight a war of the scale that is required in Iraq.

And Putin knows this. So it’s almost like a trap. The United States, you go in Iran, it’s a, it’s a bait, right? It’s a bait. And, and, and, and so I think, like, like, yes, America is going to go to Iran, but it’s going to lose this war. And this will allow Putin to secure his. It will allow Putin to consolidate his grip over Ukraine and Europe. So what do you think Iran’s response is going to be this time? Because it seems as though they were definitely reining it in, in terms of their response last time.

They were not using their full potential because they knew that they didn’t have escalation, dominance, probably how far will they go in terms of exacting punishment on Israel, knowing that ultimately, I mean, they’re in a very tough spot because if they start to get the upper hand, then it’s Samson option. Right. So do you think there’s going to be a race for nukes? Is anybody going to provide a nuclear umbrella for Iran or is there going to be like, what, what about China’s role? Right, okay, so if you look at, from game theory perspective, Iran cannot possibly defeat Israel and the United States in the conventional warfare.

And as you point out, if this escalates too far, then Israel always has a central option. The United States can always choose to nuke Iran. And also remember that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has assigned a mutual defense pact and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. So if Saudi Arabia is drawn into this war, then Iran is out of trouble. So from gain third perspective, Iran does not want to fight a commercial war with the United States and Israel. The only way for Iran to defeat the United States is to draw the United States into Iran and set the trap.

And so the best option for them is to close the Strait of Hormuz. Because if you close off the Strait of Hormuz, it’s almost like a choke point on the global economy. You look at Southeast Asia, Japan, South Korea, China, they all depend on oil from the Middle east to fuel their economies. And so there’d be tremendous pressure on the United States to send in ground troops to relieve the choke point. So I think that’s what’s going to happen. I think like, maybe in the second round you have more escalation, but the big question is whether or not we ran close to all that strict Hormuz.

And if they do, then America will be forced to send in ground troops and slowly this will escalate into a full scale ground invasion of the ramp. I don’t know the actual, actual timeline. I think that that’s the gist of what will happen. And this may take another year, this may be six months, who knows? Okay, but, but, but it’s going to be a very prolonged process because remember, both sides are trying to maintain as much strategic flexibility as possible. And both sides are trying to win the information war. They’re trying to win the war public opinion.

So no one wants to blame for like, you know, destroying the world, basically. When it comes to China, theoretically China is very dependent on Iranian oil. And theoretically China will defend Iran if it’s attacked. And that’s why Trump’s next move is very important. I predict the next three months Trump will visit China. And there’ll be a major rapportment between the United States and, and China. And there’d be lots of concessions that Trump will make that make China look very good. For example, Trump may say that I promise to not allow Taiwanese independence, and this will be a major, major concession to China.

Right. That’s a thing that China really, really wants. A guarantee from Americans that they will not support Taiwan independence, and maybe there’ll be relaxation of tariffs. Okay. But I think in the next three months, there’ll be a major reproachment between China and the United States. And publicly, it will seem as though Trump has won. But behind the scenes, because what matters is, of course, behind the scenes, I think that China will allow the Americans to do what. What they want to do in Iran. So I think that’s what. That’s what will happen the next three months.

Really? Well, that’s a bold prediction. I mean, if, if you get that one right, I think you’re going to be immortalized here on YouTube because that’s a very bold prediction. It seems to be contrary to a lot of what we’re seeing. But, I mean, on the other hand, they tariff India, but they didn’t tariff China as a consequence. So it makes you wonder, you know, they’re leaving that door open. Presumably, despite all the tough talk earlier than the year about the big tariffs, which did escalate and of course it, it retraced. But nonetheless, I still think they stated earlier in the year that China and the Pacific was their central focus, but then they kind of walked it back, and now they’re saying, well, it’s actually the homeland and it’s the, you know, the Western Hemisphere.

So these guys are kind of all over the map. It’s really difficult. I can’t for the life of me see how they could imagine defending Taiwan or that that’s going to be a good idea or a war that’s remotely winnable. I mean, it makes no sense. But they are starting to move the semiconductor factories back to the United States, a process which will take many years. So perhaps they’re, you know, they got it in their head. So you think that China will basically relinquish any responsibility in CENTCOM with Iran for the promise of this rapprochement between the United States and them? Yeah.

So I’ll make certain points. Okay, so you just compare the first Trump term, the second Trump term. They’re very concrete steps, thinking against China. Right. So you had terrorists, but you also had the kicking out of Chinese journalists in America and China Reciprocated by kicking out American journalists. Right. The Wall Street Journal, New York Times are all kicked out of China. You had the closing of the American consulate in Chengdu. There were actually very concrete steps taken on both sides that signal confrontation. And this time around, okay, you don’t have that. Trump doesn’t seem to be that concerned about China.

So yeah, there were some terms slapped on China, but there were, but it was consistent with other tariffs. And as you say, the terms stopped on China were not as harsh as those slapped on India. So I think there’s lots of space for negotiation. Also, there’s a rumor that there’s a new national defense parties plan being being drafted right in the Pentagon that calls for the removal of American forces in Southeast Asia to focus on homeland. On the homeland. So basically to avoid the possibility of an accidental confrontation between America and China in the South China Sea.

So I think there’s lots of signs now that the relationship, it’s warming up and the stage is being set for in a row for. And that is my big, my big prediction that I’m making. Yes. Well, it’s interesting in light of the big military parade where China was clearly sort of posturing as the leader of all. They pretty much had the whole gang there. You know, he had Lukashenko, Putin, Kim Jong Un. I mean, you had everybody there. Right. So I’m not so sure. I’m not entirely convinced that that’s going to happen, but anything is possible.

They’re definitely, you know, they’ve definitely softened the, the actions that they’re taking against China compared to what they, they were saying earlier in the year. And it was pretty strict at one point. Right. Like 160% tariffs at one point that was pretty severe. You know, still enabling Taiwan with various weapon systems, although at a seemingly slower pace. There’s still a lot of military activity in and around that region. It’s, it’s difficult to say, but it’s interesting. So you think that the, the Russians basically are the ones who have a vested interest in getting the United States ensnared in this quagmire situation? I know there have been reports that they’ve recently been sending more equipment there.

I don’t know to what extent. So do you think that China will completely kind of extricate itself from that or will it try to maybe assist? Do they not have an interest in kind of keeping the Americans occupied there as well? So, so a really important point that I need to emphasize is that right now China does not have a blue water navy. If it were to develop a blue water navy, it would bring it in direct confrontation with the United States. Right. It would make sense for trying to have a blue water navy because it has all these ports, ports scattered around the world.

It’s like 31 ports in South America. So, so China is heavily invested in global trade. At the same time, it doesn’t have a blue water navy. So when trade ships go overseas to deliver all these goods, it’s the American Navy that’s protecting these Chinese ships. Right. So there’s almost a symbiotic relationship between America and China. And so that’s why I don’t think China will, will seek confrontation with America. What China wants to do is sort of like be the big brother in all this confrontation. China wants to be the peacemaker. So even though you know Russia and the United States are fighting in Ukraine, Russia will definitely help Iran when America invades.

China wants to still be the objective neutral peacemaker to allow these different parties to come to the table and try and negotiate a peace. And so I think the next five years you’ll see that China will play a more vocal role at the United Nations. The diplomats will come out and try to strike a consolidated tone between the United States and Russia because it doesn’t benefit China in any way for the world to descend into chaos. China got rich through globalization, through global trade. If a war breaks out anywhere, then the Chinese economy is severely affected.

So that gap though is, is narrowing, right. Like the, the lack of blue water navy. I mean China is expanding their navy at a rapid rate. What, what is it that constitutes having a blue water navy? Because they have several aircraft carriers. They have, they’re building what like 300 warships a year or something to that effect. Yeah. When do they cross that Rubicon of being of constituting a blue water navy? Right. So if you look at a map, okay, China is now encompassed by island chains are controlled by the United States. Okay. So something called the first island chain that basically restricts Chinese movement.

Okay. And this first island chain is essentially Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, but then there are some, two other chains as well. What is important is that if you’re a blue water navy, you need ports in order to refuel, in order to, this is for logistical purposes, right? So unless you have these, unless you break out of these island chains and you really don’t have blue water navy, you have, you have, you know, you might have a lot of ships, but it’s really easy to sink aircraft carriers with ballistic missiles nowadays. So that’s what I mean. I mean, if, if China has a strategy to, to break out of these island chains and establish their own port networks for the military, then you, we can see that like China has these global ambitions, but if right now all they’re doing is building these ports to facilitate global trade and they don’t have the military support, then they’re, they’re now heavily reliant on the US Navy for protection against pirates.

And you know, so yeah, so do you believe that they’ll continue to be a formidable force moving forward? And will the interests, I guess, with the Russians and the Chinese and the Iranians, won’t that at some point come into conflict with this arrangement with China and the United States? Or do you really think that will that relationship being bridged, that you foresee with the rapprochement with the United States and Beijing, will it in some way mitigate the war with Russia or will it not have any effect on that? Right, so what’s happening around the world? The much larger geosturesic picture is something called the heartland versus Greenland thesis.

So the idea of the heartland is the Eurasian continent and the idea of Greenland, our global trade facilitate through the sea. Now Britain and America are both naval powers and the way that they maintain control of the world is by forcing trade on the seas. And you do that by making the Eurasian continent a complete mess, basically having these countries fight each other. So no one power emerges to unite Eurasia and allow or trade inland trade through railways. And that’s the, you know, British and American policy for the past 300 years. And it’s worked out very successful.

But if Russia is able to control Ukraine and is able to protect Iran and it aligns with China, then you have now the heartland in place. And as a result you can negate the sea. You don’t have to have to like confront the US Navy because US Navy is not redundant. All the trade is now done through railways. Yeah, okay. Yeah. So the, the goal is to kind of just create that infighting. So the eastern countries must be aware of this, this dichotomy that you’re talking about. And so they, it’s in their interest then to work together, wouldn’t it be? Well, you know, Germany and The Soviet Union, 1930s was also aware of the intentions of the Anglo American empire and they still went to war with each other.

So it’s a very complicated dynamic. I mean, hopefully, I mean, the grand hope is that Russia, China, Iran, they get together and they create this trade pact and this will allow for peace and prosperity in Eurasia. But you know, the British Americans are very good at creating conflict. In fact, you can make the argument that for the past 20 years all these global conflicts were created by the British in order to maintain their trade hegemony around the world. Yeah. And it seems like the only real hedge against that is to have these unitary governments like these strongman figures, be it the Ayatollah or Putin or xi, somebody who can kind of stick around and view things long term.

So not to succumb to the infighting in that, that civil discourse which is exploited by the west, as you say, to typically divide and conquer. Right. Well, you know, it’s really, right now it’s a really essential crisis for the Anglo American empire. If Putin succeeds in controlling Ukraine, in consolidating Ukraine, if Iran is allowed to trade with China and Russia, Russia, the angel American empire collapses because it’s really a positive scheme, right. This petrol dollar, the U.S. so this is, this is why it’s existential. I think you just, you just said it right there. Like, you know, I’ve, I’ve often struggled to articulate this point to people that, you know, it’s about the US dollar and, and things like that.

But I think how you just explained it there was so perfect because it really puts in perspective that if, if the US allows those relationships to thrive and mature, then effectively it’s not only a multipolar world, it’s that nobody wants the dollar anymore maybe. And it quickly will potentially overtake. It’s a Thucydides trap, I suppose. Well, I mean, the issue right now is that America is a party scheme. It has $37 trillion in debt and if people stop buying US Treasuries, the process can collapse onto itself. Right. So it doesn’t have a choice in the matter.

It’s either, you know, your entire economy collapses or you fight these wars. And so they don’t fight these wars. Yeah. And I recently read a statistic that said that the, the amount of foreigners investing in the US stock market is at all time highs right now. So it’s not just the adoption of the dollar, it’s actually the adoption of like the U.S. you know, trading platform as well. Yeah. So the entire source of American wealth is perception that it is an empire. You have absolutely no choice but to invest in the empire if you want to keep your money safe.

But if, but if Russia controls Ukraine, if it, if it completely defeats NATO in Ukraine and Russia has control over one third of the world’s carbohydrates, then that perception is going to change. Yeah. And really, at this point, I think the only thing that could, because America has some really good sort of geographic strengths that have insulated it. And I think it makes people think that, you know, my money’s safe there because there’s two oceans. It’s a relatively stable democracy, although that is a little uncertain at this point in time. So people can feel confident knowing that their money is going to be safe in the vault in the United States.

But there’s ways that that can be undermined as well. And I think there’s forces that are working to try to, you know, basically destroy the US from the inside out. I mean, why wouldn’t you. Right. Like, why wouldn’t you want to stoke those divisions in order to create an unstable situation whereby a civil unrest ensues? And what are your thoughts on that? Well, I mean, you’re actually right in that America looks like a good investment from the outside in that it is a continental fortress, it is invincible. But the way that America is abusing its exorbitant privilege.

Yeah, the corruption in the country, I mean, there’s a very strong likelihood that America will default on its debt at some point. So you always want to hedge against that as well. And that’s why we’re seeing this massive movement towards gold around the world. Like, you know, in China, before people bought US dollars, now they’re buying gold. And so what America has to do is show the world that it is still the hegemon and that no one can possibly challenge it. And if you dare to find a hedgeon will come and basically beat the crap out of you.

I mean, honestly, right now, like, the way I see things, America is descending into a mafia state, and it’s not. And I don’t think that that’s an exaggeration. I agree. And is the culture there in China, like, I, I see a lot of videos, people buying gold is, is it really popular there against the re. The retail class, the people are purchasing gold in large amounts, or is it more the central bank? Yeah, I mean, I mean, before again, Chinese would like to store their wealth in America. They want to immigrate, send their kids to America for college and buy US Dollars.

But given the geopolitical situation and given the uncertainty that the Trump government has brought to America, it’s very possible next year or two, America descends civil conflict. Chinese are now more reluctant to buy US Dollars and they’re shifting, shifting towards gold. And it’s a very, very clear trend right now in China. So you’ve said before that you thought that one of the ways that they will, you know, take attention away from domestic issues, be it, you know, like a financial crisis or something like that, was to, to create an outside enemy. You know, you kind of need an enemy at the gates and that can take attention away from all your domestic woes.

So do you suspect that that part of this rallying cry for war is because they know, you know, the market’s in a bubble, they’re going to default on their debt, you know, it’s going to be chaos in the streets. And this is a great way to channel that anger outwards and control it and point it in a direction which they’ll be able to exploit for. Along multiple economic and geopolitical lines. Yeah. So I think the elite is extremely unimaginative. They have a certain playbook on how to maintain power and certainly divert and deflect is one of the major strategies.

So starting wars overseas is one strategy, but also like, they’re thinking about like civil wars, like, you know, instigating a civil war in the United States. I mean, there’s also talk of an alien invasion, of like staging alien invasion. So, you know, I mean, I think they’re looking at different options right now. And it’s really like, you know, what option actually works? Because right now people are skeptical. Right? I mean, nowadays you have the Internet, you have channels like what you’re doing, and people are not aware, like there’s very strong possibility in the next, you know, few weeks there’s a false flag operation in America and we should be aware of it.

There should be a false flag operation in Europe and you are on binance anymore. So the elite are getting more and more desperate. But, you know, like, the elite, as they get more and more desperate, they’ll just become more and more stupid. So even though people are aware of what’s happening, it’s not going to stop them from doing what they’re going to do. Yeah, it seems like, you know, unfortunately people are quite credulous. It never seems to amaze me what and how simple it is to control and manipulate people on a massive scale. So I’m not very optimistic about resistance actually fomenting into something significant usually that’s exploited as well.

And I think they’re, they’re smart enough that they know, they know who’s like the, the influence in society, which is why in American society, they quickly got wise and Trump got wise to the fact that there’s all these like, social media influencers who are basically your inroad to the minds of the masses. And so that changed in the 2010s, you know, what used to be like mainstream media, media talking heads, and it shifted into these social media influencers. So they’ve really conscript them to. To kind of promote the messages. So, yeah, it’s interesting to see that dynamic develop.

So in terms of Russia and Europe, then, what do you think the likelihood is of that going nuclear? Because, you know, I’ve always known that the war wasn’t going to end when Trump was elected. Now it’s actually surprising even me to see him talking about the deployment of Tomahawk missiles and, you know, these things which would provoke a major response from Russia that would have to be outside what is at least conventional by current standards. So what do you think the potential of that is? And I know you think it’s going to flare up in and around Odessa.

Where do you think Russia’s red Line is? I think there’s a zero possibility that a war will go nuclear in this age. I think there’s just too many restraints. It’s like the only taboo. Right? I mean, no leader in the world wants to be responsible for the structures of humanity. Also, even though these countries are at war, there are tons of back channels, and so they’re communicating with each other all the time. So even though Ukraine and Russia are at war, there are a thousand people that are interlopers, and they’re trying to control the parameters of the war so it never escalates into an imperial confrontation.

At the same time, I do think feel as though what’s happening in Ukraine may be a replay of World War I. You know, a war that lasted for four or five years and saw really the killing of millions and millions of young people and a war from which Europe really never recovered. So I will. I do believe that this war will continue to escalate, but I think they won’t break that taboo. I don’t think this war will ever go nuclear. So you believe that there are certain interlocutors on the back channel that are preventing this from, or setting the parameters for what’s acceptable and whatnot.

It just seems kind of crazy to me to think that here you are trying to economically destroy Russia, which would lead to, presumably the leader there being dethroned and taken out of power and possibly lead to the collapse of the society, and that they wouldn’t. That they would allow that to happen. You know, like it’s. It doesn’t make any sense that there’d be these rules to the game, that that kind of Supersede, you know, what we see. I’m not as optimistic that this thing could get out of hand, because if the stated intention, I mean, unless the, the west is willing to make some concessions and say, okay, but they’ve already blew up Nord Stream, I mean, they’ve already kind of nuked their relationship with Russia for probably a long time, I presume.

Anything’s possible, mind you, but usually those types of divides are only bridged if one side wins. So like how we’ve seen after, you know, after a nuke was dropped on Japan, the United States and, and Japan became, you know, the best of friends after that within a relatively short period of time. But that only happened because one side won. You know, as long as you have this festering enmity between the two sides, which is economically based, it doesn’t seem like a situation that is quite going to be left to, to, to chance or that there has to be either a defeat, like a definitive defeat, or, you know, maybe that’s going to be a collapse from the inside.

I don’t know. What do you think about that? Right. So I’m, I’m going to try to get into Putin’s hat. Okay, so I’m Putin, and how do I see what’s going on? Well, first of all, I think I’m winning a war. Why? Because first of all, my troops on the front lines, they’re extremely dedicated. They, you know, they’re very creative. If you just look, look at what’s happening on the front lines. These Russian troops are developing new tactics all the time to counter NATO advanced weaponry. Okay. So one example is they use these motorbikes and they also use firmer cloaks.

So the frontline troops are, they have really high morale. They’re very creative, they’re energetic, and they really believe in their mission. So I really believe in my frontline troops also. If I’m trying to win this war, I don’t have to win this war conventionally. I don’t have to win this war on the battlefield. Why? Because I know for a fact that these regimes, these governments in Europe, Britain, Germany, France are extremely fragile. And the people in Europe don’t want this war. They don’t understand why, why there’s this war going on. You go back to 2014. Europeans had access to cheap Russian gas.

They had good lives. German industry was booming. People’s, the economy was, was doing very well. Now you fast forward to today. The German economy has collapsed. People are freezing the winter, and it’s not their war. They don’t understand why NATO is fighting you, fighting Russia and Ukraine. What’s the point of all this? Why can’t we just trade peacefully? And also like, why did the Americans have to blow up North Stream? So the people don’t support this war. And the elite, European elite, they’re beholding to their American masters. So this war keeps on dragging on. And if people are required to make sacrifices in order to continue to support this war, then people in Europe are eventually going to rebel.

You know, you see these massive protests in France, in Britain. I mean, it’s very hard for the governments there to control the sort of popular discontent. And so if I’m Putin, I’m like, I don’t have to win this war. All to do is drag this war out and eventually these regimes will collapse. The difference between Russia and Europe is Russia has a lot of stuff, you know, Europe doesn’t really have much stuff left. Right. They’re built on imperialism and all that. So in since the, you know, post colonial age, they’ve been dependent on like the service based economy and now it’s kind of running its course.

So they need Russian stuff. So will they accept defeat is the question. And I think you said it yourself that you thought that they would use the threat of war to try to, you know, bring people under control and quell that civilization, civil discourse. I suppose that the question is what will they do in order to manufacture that consent? Could it be a false flag? Could it be, you know, that they really need to vilify the Russians? I read a, a poll recently that showed that Polish support for the war. Now this could be a biased survey, but it went up from 24% to 43%.

But do you think it would be that hard to, to manufacture that consent for another conflict if the conditions were right? I mean, Russia is playing it very safe right now, is looking at the UAV map of the big attack they did just two days ago. And you’ll notice that they’re steering clear of the Polish border, like it’s all going to Kiev. They’re not even targeting Lviv anymore. Yeah. So I think throughout this war, the Russians have been extremely strategic. They’ve been, they’ve shown tremendous restraint. So they’re targeting, you know, critical military infrastructure and they’re trying to avoid targeting civilian infrastructure.

And as you say, they’re trying to avoid direct confrontation with NATO, even though they know that NATO is already in Ukraine supporting the Ukrainians. And I think you’re absolutely right in that the European elite, they will not give up the, this war. They’re going to. It’s like some cost fallacy. Like it’s in a casino and you’ve lost a million dollars. Well, you’re not going to leave the casino until you win it back. And so it’s not just about getting the resources that Russia has, but it’s also about like, you know, some cost policy. They’ve dug themselves a hole and they can’t get themselves out of the hole.

And I think you’re absolutely right in that the population, it’s much more compliant than we can imagine. And maybe at first because of false flag operations, because of social media, because of propaganda, the people are invested in this war, especially in places like Poland, which would be directly threatened if Russia wins this war in Ukraine and the Baltic states. Poland, the Baltic states would be heavily invested in fighting Russia and Ukraine because they’re afraid that eventually Putin will come for them. And I think Putin will eventually come for them. But again, war requires sacrifice. It requires people to give up their lives.

It requires people to suffer. And I don’t think Western Europeans, the French, the Germans, the British are willing to make the sacrifice necessary in order to win the war. And that’s what Putin is betting on. Yes, sending your NATO troops, call up a draft, you know, have all this nationally, nationally jingling your countries. But are your people willing to make the sacrifices necessary to win this war the way that the Russian people are willing to make the sacrifices? And the answer is absolutely not. I mean, I mean, like, are these young people in Britain, in France and Germany, are they willing to go off and die in a foreign land that they’ve never been to and which they don’t really care about, I don’t think they are.

Yeah, it seems like unless there’s some sea change in terms of, you almost need a bit of nationalism as well. And a lot of the European countries are getting away from that, or at least some are. You know, you’re seeing a resurgence. And this is perhaps where it could actually turn over is where you have this anti immigrant sentiment and weaponized and then that becomes the kind of like what’s happening in the US that sort of patriotic invocation can, can morph into what they’re looking for there with that, you know, crusade like mentality. So I think for the past 50 years the Europeans have been very effective at the looting nationalism because remember, in their opinion, it was nationalism that caused the tragedies of the 20th century, World War I and World War II.

So you need open border borders, you need anti racism, you need multiculturalism in Order to prevent a major, like, calamity from emerging again. And so Europeans are almost brainwashed to think that nationalism isn’t evil. So I don’t know how and all. And I think that Europeans now are really angry about immigration, mass immigration, and they should be okay. I’ll be honest. This is how World War II started. Right? Because there was that mentality. And then, you know, Hitler came in with all of the nationalist sort of sentiments and catered to people’s desire to, you know, and if the Europeans had a charismatic leader, then, yeah, maybe people would rally around the flag.

But the Europeans don’t have a charismatic leader. Right. You look at Starmer, you look at Merge, you look at Macron, these are heated figures within their own countries. You look at the popular ratings. Well, they’re almost creating the conditions, though, for somebody like that to emerge. Who knows who it’s going to be in every country, there’s, you know, somebody, some resistance element. Yeah. I think that maybe that’s how this, that’s how this emerges. And this is why, at the time being, you know, Putin is probably all for that civil unrest, but he must, if he’s a chess player, he must say, see this how it will unfold in the coming years, when, okay, there’s that, there’s this nationalist resurgence, and that is harnessed at some point because that will be what is required, just like it’s happening in the United States.

You need that to go to war. And now with the turning points thing and the Trump and, you know, you have that almost right. So what Putin will say to Europeans, is this, okay, very simple message. Am I your enemy or are the Americans your enemy? It’s the Americans who are forcing you to pay these tariffs. It’s these Americans that blow up your north stream. It’s these Americans that are forcing you to fight this war in Ukraine. Right. Who’s the enemy here? If you really believe in nationalism, would you not want national sovereignty? Would you not want to be able to decide your own future? Do you really want a CIA meddling you in elections? Do you want these American puppets running your government? Okay.

That’s a message that Putin wouldn’t make to the European people. And I, I think this is a much stronger message than, oh, let’s fight the Russians because the Russians are evil. Yeah, it’s. It’s definitely, it’s definitely possible. Okay. I wanted to ask you, I know you spent some time in Canada, and I’m wondering what your, what your perception is of Canadian politics, Canadian society. It seems as though we’re drifting into more of a authoritarian state. And how do you think it compares to China? Like, because I think there’s a lot of misconceptions around freedom and liberty as it’s experienced in China.

Are China and Canada comparable or are we even more stringent than they are there? Yeah. So I would love to have a conversation with you about this because I have my own personal experiences and I want to ask you if my experiences are actually typical. So I was born in China, but I grew up in Canada in the 80s and 90s. It was the best time to be a young person in Canada because it was free, the economy was doing well, you were allowed to just play until 9pm by yourself every night. And I, I. And it was a wonderful childhood.

So I’m in China. I’ve been in China for the past 30 years working as an educator. I have three young children and China is an urban jungle and the air isn’t that clean. And I want my kids to experience freedom, like the way I experience freedom in Canada in the 80s and 90s. I want them to access to fresh air, which is, to me, very important. So this summer I took my two boys back to camp, to Toronto. That’s where my parents are. We were there for two months and every day went to the park, we went to the cottage.

I tried to give, like, an authentic Canadian experience. And I was appalled by the social conformity in Canada nowadays. Nowadays your kid has to be on a leash. You’re not allowed to let your kid wander and explore. And so one story is that we were in a park in Toronto and my young boy, who’s four years old, he went exploring by himself and he was confronted by a stranger. And this is a park and he was away. I couldn’t see him. But he’s a very independent young. He’s a very independent boy. So he just wonders, but he knows where the boundaries are.

Okay? But that day we’ve been lucky. And he was kind of a stranger who asked him, like, where’s your dad now? My boy doesn’t speak English. So the stranger took him to the local staff, like the winning pool staff, and they surrounded him, okay? And he’s 4 years old and he knows he’s being surrounded by these strangers. So in his heart he thinks, like, am I getting. Am I being. Getting kidnapped? Okay. So he faints, okay? And like, now I’m looking for him. I can’t find him because they’ve taken him inside and they call the police, they call the paramedics and Eventually, I find him.

Okay, right? And the paramedic. And I asked the paramedics what happened. He says, your boy has fainted, but he’s okay. We checked his vital signs. He’s fine. Now, the police are not questioning me, and I explained to him that, you know, I want to encourage him to independence, so I let them explore. But we’ve been there for two months, and no incident like this has happened before. It’s just a misunderstanding. And then they tried to get me to take him to the hospital. I became very confused. It’s like, I know what happened to my boy. And the paramedics say he’s fine.

I don’t want to take him to the hospital because I want to take him home, let him sleep. I want him to be safe. If I take him to hospital, I don’t know what’s gonna happen. We could be there for, like, 12 hours. Like, who knows? Yeah. What could happen? Right. And you don’t know what the doctor will say. Maybe the doctor’s inexperienced, they do some checks, and then he just has a wrong diagnosis. Who knows? But I don’t want to take the chance of exposing my child to risk that we can’t imagine. The police were insistent.

And I said to the police, listen, is it my choice as his father whether or not to take him to the hospital? And they said, of course. It’s your choice. Of course. And it’s like, fine. And I choose to take my boy home so he can rest. And the police said to me, okay, that’s fine, but first talk to our supervisor. Okay? First talk to our supervisor. I’m like, okay. So supervisor comes in, and he’s a very tall guy. He’s like 6, 8. He starts badging me with questions. He’s like, do you know how hot it is outside? Like, why are you not drinking water? Okay.

And it’s. It’s like, I committed a crime, and now he’s trying to force a confession out of me. Okay? And. But I held my grandma and says, listen, I’m his father. The parents say, he’s fine. The vital signs are fine. I’m gonna take him home. And. And then he says, if you do this, then I’m gonna report you to Child Protective Services, Children’s Aid Society, and they may prevent you from leaving the country. They may take your child away from you. And I was like, are you threatening me? Like, what crime have I committed here? And he’s like, I’m not threatening you.

Okay? But clearly he was. But then we kept on arguing for Like a long time. And eventually they recognized I was not going to relent. And you know, I was. I was basically like, give you a name, give you a number, give me your badge number. And they recognized that I might file complaint. And so they eventually said, fine, we’ll drive you home. Right. So they drove us home. They checked my id, they checked all my information. And I was just. And the irony of this is that while we’re there, the staff came to us and said, oh, oh, the park down.

Like the park downstairs. There’s a fight, you know, they’re punching each other. The police, like, call someone else. What’s going on here? Like, like, I’m a father. Yeah. You know, my son is fine. Let us go. Priorities. Where are your priorities, man? Yeah, well, that’s just how it is. They kind of nitpick it. It’s anarcho tyranny. That. That’s really what it is. It’s lawlessness. And they fixate on the people who are, you know, trying to obey the law because they know that they’re the ones who are going to actually comply. Yeah. So it’s. Yeah, no, I think you, you.

That is a great representation of how it is pretty much everywhere. And what was scary is how ambiguous and I’m office it was because you’re not really sure where the lines are, right. They don’t tell you what you’ve done wrong. They don’t tell you what your rights are. They don’t tell you why they’re doing this. They’re all like, like, they’re all trying to get you to comply, even though you’re like. Well, I mean, I’m his father and he ran off and it was an accident. It was a misunderstanding, but he’s fine now. So, like, what’s the issue here? Right? We’ve been here for two months and like, you feel like I committed a wrong, then come with the wrong is.

But they don’t tell you what the wrong is. They don’t tell you what your rights are. They don’t tell you what the process. And like. And so I feel as though this is just the over. Bureaucratization of society in that, you know, the police, the regulators, they’re all trying to get you to comply. Like, like that’s. That. That’s your core concern. Not to protect the law, not to protect public safety, but to get everyone to comply. And what that does is it causes the criminal element that they ignore to get worse and worse. And then the people who are obedient, you know, or who are actually willing to play by the rules.

They’re the ones that get, you know, increasingly more shellacked with all this red tape and bureaucracy for no reason. And it’s unfortunate because. Yeah, that’s, it’s. It’s a great example too, of how they leverage. Like, you talked there about the police. There was emt, and then there was also social services. So it was all of the main arms of the, the government. It’s expensive working against you. Yeah, it’s very expensive. So they probably thought that maybe they could, you know, maybe when they realized you were a smart guy and, you know, you spoke the, the language well, they, they weren’t able to do whatever it is.

They, I mean, sadly, they probably thought they were doing the right thing. Well, they, they did. They thought I was an father because I should take my child to the, to the hospital. And like, I’m like, why can’t I take my childhood hospital for like, no reason? Why would I submit my child to such agony? Like, like, I’m. I’m his father, you know, I mean, he’s my child. I would know more about my own child than a random stranger, white dude and like, you know, some silly medical equipment. I mean, like, yeah, I mean, I don’t know.

They. They are immediately the experts in that situation. And you’re just somebody who, you know, all of your life experience that you shared with that person is for, not because their expertise trumps even though they, they’re not experts. So. So, so it was humiliating. It was dehumanizing. It was scary because I really thought that these guys are so crazy in their pursuit of their own virtue that they would steal my own child from me. Right? I mean, can you imagine that? Like my child, who doesn’t speak English, and they were so insistent on taking my child to the hospital, so insistent I comply, that they were willing to take my own child away from me.

So would something like that happen in China? No, it would not. It would not because there are lots of red tape, there are lots of rules, but people have a sense of empathy here. Right? Understand? Listen, you’re a father, your kid is playful, he runs away. That’s normal, right? And like, honestly, 10 years ago, common sense, it’s just common that 10 years ago everyone kind of would have thought the same way. But I think like, you know, after Covid now, with the declining economy, with the over fair inflation of society, with mass immigration in Canada destroying the social pathway, people have lost their common sense and people are sort of overwhelmed with fear and anxiety and so they behave like bureaucrats.

And see, one of our greatest fears as preppers is what happens in a disaster when those people are empowered with like emergency powers. So when you see that on steroids, where we kind of seen that during COVID where all of these people who, you know, I, I guess it just went to their heads and they had this little hint of power and they leveraged it to the fullest. But in a disaster situation, of the many multitude of poly crises that could unfold, you know, how is that psychological element going to run amok in society? Because I think it will be a big problem.

And you know, I completely agree. There’s something called a Dunning Kruger effect, which is like the more confident you are, the more power you have, the stupider you become. Right. So a bureaucracy, Canada is like way overbear for ties. As you say, they’re not challenged because they’re all in it together. There’s no checks and balances, there’s no accountability, there’s no transparency. So in a disaster when there’s maybe a physical event. Right. Then they don’t know how to respond and all the responses will be idiotic and incompetent. Yeah. And this is one of the greatest things that is the most challenging for a lot of us as preparedness minded people.

How are we going to deal with that threat? Because it’s one thing to have to get some water, get some food, food, deal with personal security, things of that nature. Those are very sort of one dimensional problems. But dealing with a totalitarian government, you know, who is running on these sort of conformist principles is very challenging. And so how do you think prepping fits into your understanding of game theory and geopolitics? Where do you think this preparedness prepper archetype emerges? And is it present in the east in the same way that it is here in the West? I know China has a.

China and Russia have like sort of a collective prepping culture whereby you know, you guys have underground cities, you have like this kind of collectivist sort of mentality that is kind of insulating against major catastrophes here. It’s of kind, kind of like dog eat dog, every man for himself. So as a prepper you see that and you see the challenges that you’re potentially up against and it almost forces you to, to want to be. While this whole like self sufficiency, self sustainability, is that even a cultural phenomena there or is that just a western phenomenon? Okay, so I know it sounds paradoxical, but I think that in China people are much more prepared for disaster than people in Canada.

I agree. Actually. So, so I mean there’s this perception of China as a dictatorship, but in reality people are free to do what they believe is, is they should do. And so society, it’s much more flexible, it’s much more resilient, it’s much more dynamic than in Canada where you do have a very therapeutized top down system that demands compliance. So if a disaster struck in China, people don’t assume the government’s going to come. They assume that we have to work together. So there’s a much greater emphasis on family, on human relationships to resolve issues. And that’s the key, like to focus on human relationships because it’s only by working together that you can resolve, that you can prepare for disasters.

But in Canada like it’s, people have been itemized, you know, people have been individualized and they think that okay, is this disaster, I’ll just call 911 or I’ll just wait for the government to come. If the government doesn’t come, then what do you do? Right, well you should go talk to your neighbor. You should form, you know, grassroots communities in order to respond to disasters. But as you say, the government doesn’t want that. The government doesn’t want you to be self reliant because that’s a threat to their bureaucracy. Yeah, that, that’s very interesting. So that, that sort of collectivist local mindset.

Yes. Or just being more kind of solution focused is, is insulating against potential threats. Whereas here, because we’re. So you’re either conditioned to just, you know, call the government and fix all your problems or you’re somebody who is kind of railing or recoiling against that and you’re trying to. The only way to kind of counteract that is with excessive like self sufficiency. Whereas that would be something that wouldn’t really lend itself. Well to the, the climate where you are like a guy, you know, like the, the lone man in the wilderness is not a Chinese sort of archetype.

Yeah. Also remember that Canadians are the luckiest people on the planet. You know, Canadians have never experienced war, never experienced famine, never have experienced disasters, but Chinese have. So Chinese are much more resilient. But look, the reality is that eventually you, luck will run out. Eventually there’s going to be a massive geophysical event, There might be some massive wars. That’s going to be very traumatic. That’s going to force Canadians to come together and to be resilient together. And for that to happen you have to watch channels like Yours and be skeptical about the world around you and really try to educate yourself on different possibilities.

Yeah, you know, we. We’ve experienced World War I and World War II, but our participation was, you know, more remote. There would never was, like, an existential threat to the motherland type thing. So I see what you’re saying there. I wanted to ask you a question about. You’re familiar with the Hundred Flowers campaign with the Maoists? Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It’s like the idea where, like, the Chinese government allowed people to kind of speak freely about their opinions and before, like, cracking down. Do you think there’s any parallels with that and what we’re seeing in social media right now, like on X Sometimes I’m wondering, like, it’s being talked about as this platform where you can speak freely, speak your mind, but what if that is someday weaponized by big tech? You know, it’s almost like they want people to feel free to express themselves.

And you’re really starting to see that now. People are really feeling emboldened to say whatever they want. And I’m like, are you sure you should be. You sure you want to go down that path? Because maybe they’re, like, setting you up because they want to see, like, who the. The problem people are going to be when, you know, I don’t know. Did you ever. Yeah. Any parallels between those two things? I mean, that’s a great point. I mean, I mean, remember that the Internet is a creation of the American military. It’s the American military that controls all the hardware, the fiber optics, the servers, like, where all the data is stored.

So you really need to be careful what you say online. You don’t want to leave too much of a written record because all this data, they’re sucking it up. Okay. That’s something that social media companies do anyway. They’re trying to create an individual profile who you are, and that’s what they’re trying to categorize you, and they’re trying to predict your behavior. And so right now they’re using that to sell you ads. Right? They’re trying to. They’re using that to promote ads, to make you buy stuff. But that can easily be transformed into seeing who is will be compliant, who will not be compliant, and how to best ensure your certain behavior.

Right. And also to create civil conflicts, how to feed you certain information to make you much more violent, to make you much more hostile if you want to. Instead of civil war, civil unrest, then social media would be a major tool in that. Absolutely. Yeah. It’s just it’s, it’s interesting, that 100 Flowers campaign example. Most people are unaware, but I guess the idea was that the government, the Chinese government at the time, encouraged people to speak freely, their opinions, and those who did and felt emboldened to do so were eventually had it weaponized against them. And I just wonder if that is not replicating itself in some form here.

I just had one more question for you. I just can’t remember exactly. I have several questions, but I think I need to wrap it up because I’m starting to. My head’s starting to pulsate with this sickness, unfortunately. Caught me on a really bad day. Okay, so, you know, you’ve talked a lot about how China is very measured and is non confrontational. What’s the red line? When they would make a move. When. When would they be forced to engage or come to the direct military support of either Russia or Iran? When do they assist in a capacity which is not just industrial or behind the scenes? Right.

So China’s red line, and it’s been very explicit about this, is national sovereignty. So whenever its borders are infringed upon, then China will be forced to act. So that is the ultimate red line. If any nation tries to separate, you know, Chinese territory from China, then China’s forced back. That could be Taiwan, but that could also include Tibet. I could also include Xinjiang. So that’s the ultimate red line. And beyond that, I really don’t, I really don’t see any other red lines. I know there are these territorial spews in the South China Sea, but that can be negotiated.

But if any nation were to branch upon Chinese national sovereignty, then the Chinese military would be forced to act. So you don’t think there’s a situation, excuse me, in which American encroachment into Taiwan elicits a military response? Like what, what do you make of this? These rumors that China is building these ferries as a way to stage an amphibious landing on Taiwan. Like, do you believe there’s credit to that? Or. Right. So if you just look at a map, okay, so whatever naval blockade China can implement against Taiwan can itself be blockaded because of the first island chain, if that makes sense to you.

Right, because America has bases in Japan and South Korea. And so whatever blockade that you have against Taiwan can’t be sustained in the long term because all these ships can just be bombed. So the possibility of trying to pull this off is. It just, it’s just ridiculous. I mean, it won’t be happening. It’s like, no one’s just stupid like, to, like, you know, bury tanks across an island. I mean, like, like, it is possible, okay? If the national sovereignty of China is threatened, China will impose an economic blockade on Taiwan. You know, you blockade Taiwan, then people are going to have to make lots of sacrifices.

They’ll be a lot poorer. And Taiwanese people are like, why? Why would we want to do that? Why would we want to anger China? For the sake of. Sake of a principle or, you know, for the idea of independence? That makes no sense. So just go to Taiwan. Like, no one’s talking about a war between Taiwan and China. You come to China. No one’s talking about a war between China and Taiwan. It’s. It’s a Pentagon that’s promoting the idea of a war, because the Pentagon is this imperial bureaucracy that’s always looking to justify its existence. But aren’t the Taiwanese.

Aren’t they, like I was reading, they have, like, war preparation guys where they’re preparing for, like, a landed invasion. I believe one was put out in 2023, and they recently put out one that was kind of more of a general emergency preparedness manual. Like, you don’t think there’s a real. That they consider it to be a real threat? I mean, I’m sure there are these contingency plans in place because that’s what a military does, right? A military needs to have different condition quests in place. You know, there’s contingency plans if there’s an alien invasion, right? That’s something called continuous government.

You don’t think it’s because, I mean, they were able to do, you know, amphibious invasions in World War II. Like, if anybody could do something like that, you think it would be the Chinese? Again, I’m just saying that if I’m the Chinese military, and let’s just say that I really want to take over Taiwan, right? Yeah. Then, then my best option is not an F, is landing, because that’s dangerous and it requires. Do a blockade. You just do a blockade, right? You economically blockade the, the, the Taiwan. And after, you know, a year, they’ll submit because they’re like, why? Why are we fighting? You know, China, which is like, you know, so much bigger than we are.

And they don’t want to blow up all the, you know, chip factories and all that stuff either, right? Like, they want to. That’s probably the, the, the way to do it, with the least amount of clock damage. But also the optics are terrible, right? I mean, like, think of all the social. We live in the age of social media. Like, look at all the images we’re seeing from Gaza. Right. I mean like an ethereum landing will just be like really ugly and that’s going to compel Japan and South Korea to start remilitarizing against China. So you, you don’t foresee the Americans getting too involved in Taiwan, that it elicits a blockade from China because China is fearing an American response? I mean, doesn’t China have the ability to counter that response right now? America is overextended.

You know, it’s got this, you know, war in Venezuela, it’s got this war in Ukraine, it’s got this war in Iran. I don’t understand why America would start investing more resources in Taiwan. Yeah, well, I mean, I don’t either. I mean, I guess the, the argument would be that semiconductors are that important and that AI is really that important to them that they’re willing to risk it all. Like it’s the new, it’s the new oil, it’s the new gold. So maybe there, there is a race for artificial super intelligence and if they can’t keep Taiwan and lockdown, then the Chinese are going to get their first, first.

I mean, there’s that argument, I suppose. Okay. That there’s also, I suppose the argument that if that China really is the only true, you know, peer competitor to the US and thus they have to try to keep them down. So again, my prediction is that within the next six months there’ll be a major repulsement between China and America. I think that Trump will eventually visit Beijing and they will send a lot, they’ll sign a lot of mouse that signal a major approach, man. So I would look like a complete idiot if you know, China were to invade Taiwan.

So, so, so for me it’s, it’s, I think the reproachment. But it’s entirely possible there’s an invasion of Taiwan, in which case I’m a complete idiot. I mean like, like, like, like I’m pretty. No, I like, I like the different perspective. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but because the reason why I’m skeptical is because we seen what happened with Putin and Trump in Alaska. So I could, I could imagine Trump doing something like that for optics but as soon as he gets back he’s going to start tweeting. Yeah. You know, so I mean, I hope that, I hope that the economic symbiotic relationship is, you know, carries us a few more years before for things get a little existential for both sides.

I agree with you that China has a tendency to want to just protect its borders and they don’t seem to have any, you know, real imperialist ambitions that are. That aren’t just economic. But yeah, and, and I think that China will come out as the global peacemaker. Peacemaker. I think that China will continuously promote a message of peace and prosperity to the world. China will try to use its economic leverage to bring the different players to the table. So trying to negotiate peace in the Middle east, trying to negotiate peace in Ukraine, that’s where I think China’s going to focus most of its diplomatic efforts.

Okay, so reproach between China, most likely a war with Iran, Venezuela probably going to try to take out Venezuela and Europe is going to be a stalemate. That’s your predictions. Yeah. So to be honest with you, I’m actually sure what’s gonna happen in Venezuela. I think they want regime change but I think they’re gonna play play it by ear. But I think the two major flash points again will be Ukraine definitely watch what’s gonna happen between Russia and NATO and as well as the Middle east definitely what’s happening between Israel and Iran. I think these two flashpoints will be the dominant.

Will be dominant headlines the next five years. Excellent. Well, I want to thank you for coming out. We’re going to definitely have to have you back once again. I would back now go check out the Predictive History YouTube channel as well as I believe it’s. You have a clips channel as well. Right. So the two best places to find me are my predictive history YouTube channel. That’s where I upload my lectures as well as my substack also called predictive history. And that’s where I write essays and discuss geopolitics geopolitical issues of today. Perfect. All right, well thanks a lot for coming out and hopefully next time I’m not so subdued by this illness.

Yeah. So it was great talking to you. I love what you do doing. I love your channel. So hopefully appreciate that we can do this again. It’s cool to know I have fans out there in China. All right, take care. The best way to support this channel is to support yourself by gearing up@canadianpreparedness.com where you’ll find high quality survival gear at the best prices. No junk and no gimmicks. Use discount code prepping gear for 10 off. Don’t forget the strong survive but the prepared thrive stay safe.
[tr:tra].

See more of Canadian Prepper on their Public Channel and the MPN Canadian Prepper channel.