1. BobW said:

I'm an avid reader of Spengler. Love his articles. With the aforesaid giving me legitimacy to challenge a point; ... ... .

Re "Washington, from what I can tell, has no idea what sort of opponent it confronts.";

Recently, Iran signed a $US Billion ("B" as in bagel) contract with the People's Republic of China.

Much is surely missed by USG analysts re Iran. The titles are plenty. The knowledge bases are shallow. When the US Embassy was seized in 1979 by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, within the entire bloated US Embassy staff, there were only 6 (six) Farsi speakers. Since then, American society has changed with some of the most negative changes being in government. Since 1979, America has adopted egalitaranism (and also pseudo-egalitaranism.) Everyone's equal - especially in government employment.

The Bush administration was most definitely briefed in detail by Houston re the Iran-PRC contract, with implications.

Any contract at the $US 50 Bilion level incorporates a cargo security program. Remember, the Islamic Republic's contract is with China.

The Bush administration knows not to rely on the USG's institutions for analysis. They use the private sector. B43 & Co. are aware of the weakness of contemporary US institutions. Admittedly, it all demonstrates the declining US strength on the world stage.

Washington, D.C. knows what's going on. It's just that the US is weak and declining.

Kol tuv,
BobW

2. Ed D said:

Bob, unfortunately, I agree with you concerning the status of the US. I just sent to Gary Bauer, a comment on the changing times here. After Katrina and now Rita, financially, the US can not stay the course in Iraq. My suggestion, since he has the ear of the Republican Party, is either to just pull out of Iraq now ( which I'm not for or, The completely bomb the cities in the Anbar Province into total and complete destruction. Try to give the Kurds their own country which they deserve, down to Mosul and to include all of the oil around Kirkuk. Then we should withdraw and let the Shia's take care of the Sunni. Should we not do so, it's not because of the war, but the financial stability of the US>

3. lignaeus said:

I read and am told often enough too that the US is in decline, it can't afford the Iraq war, Katrina will hasten the decline etc.

In WW2 when the US was not as rich as it is now with a smaller population, not as advanced scientifically as now nor I assume industrially, though I have no idea how that compares, it fought a huge war on two major fronts for five years, millions of men and masses of military hardware, also shipped huge amounts of amrmaments to Russia and survived. Then it helped rebuild Germany and Japan and prospered itself.

The war in Iraq plus the hurricanes are surely small potatoes comparatively, so whence come the gloomy scenarios of imperial over reach?

I'm not making a case here, I just find it puzzling to say the least.

4. BobW said:

Shalom Ed,

Gary Bauer is our friend.

The problem with bombing any section of Iran is the overall oil flow for export sales. Eg, less oil from Iran could place PR China pressure on Indonesia to cover the differential. It's not really squeezing a Spalding handball but rather placing a pin next to a baloon. Japan's reaction would surely create a global panic.

I agree with you completely; it's the financial stability of the US.

Kol tuv,
Bob

5. BobW said:

Shalom Lignaeus,

It's really true. Post Vietnam, there's been a massive shift of wealth from the US to Asia-to PR China in particular. There is nothing puzzling if you take a real hard look at the environment. The famous example is Boeing China, Inc. Had Boeing not entered PRC, it would have joined the Penn Central RR into the history of bankrupts.

During WWII, the US was richer than now. This can be looked at from many different views and the same answer surfaces. I'll mention only 3 categories; America's job base has drastically eroded since the end of the Korean War (1953). The USG statistic on jobs is misleading (or, in the alternative; falsified). The USG mixes 2 factors to develop its stats: jobs and the size of the labor force. The real gauge requires accepting the labor force has sharply contracted. A 2d category is manufacturing output. USG stats use an "adjusted" or "constant output". This shows the current US manufacturing environment is similiar to immediate post WWII. It defies common sense. During WWII, sleepy Savannah, Georgia could launch one Liberty ship per week. This can't be replicated today. A 3rd category is US competitiveness. Many still believe the US is still the world's richest and most productive nation. Wage rates in much of the industrial world already are higher than US rates. Eg, Japan invests more in state of the art equipment than the US does. The US is the world's largest debtor nation - a status that's different than during WWII or the post WWII years up to the middle of the Vietnam War. The USG stats can argue differently because they adjust the value of the US dollar. In the world market, the USG position is not accepted. US competitiveness is just not present.

This all leads up to PR China entering the global market circa the early 1980s. Since the 1980s, about 50 million Americans have been receiving about $US 450 Billion ("B") in Social Security checks. This cash is not coming from taxes but from USG bond sales to foreign nations. There is an additional cost to this (the interest payment)that will be paid by the 20 and 30 year olds of today.

Don't forget that as of today, in real terms, American businesses can't buy private sector insurance because of the 9-11 terrorism threat. The insurance market is quietly being subsidized by the USG. This subsidy, like bond sales, also must be paid for.

I've been writing here about a declining standard of living in the US. I see it happening. Haven't even mentioned the medical care crisis and the need for many additional new workers. These are just my thoughts and I'm open to reevaluate any of my opinions as new info surfaces.

Kol tuv,
Bob

6. Ted Belman said:

Spengler is always worth reading. Everyone, your comments as always are erudite.

In my article The US needs a Disengagement Plan, I pointed out the growing influence of Iran and its contol of Iraq and eventually the oil fields of S. Arabia. I suggested that the US repair(retreat) to Kurdistan from where it could reek havoc with Iran, Syria, Saudia Arabia and Turkey by supporting the Kurdish separatists in those countries.

I also suggested that the US should return to its former policies of encouraging the Shiites and Sunnis to fight it out. Don't think the Sunnis will take Shiite ascendency lightly. Nor will the US. The US is using the Sunnis connection. It is building up the armed forces of Eqypt and Saudi Arabia who are in the Americasn camp sort of. They hope to get Syria turned around so it can join this camp. The Iranian nuclear threat is very real to these countries. All this is under the radar screen.