N E X T E U R O P E A N
W A R S
Maybe there will be such wars between US(SR), EU(SSR) on the one
side and Russia, India, China on the other side or in a different
constellation or even with other nations or empires. But do nations
or empires still play that role they played in the past? And who
always wins in nihilistic (modern) times? Not nations
After the ascending United States of America and the descending
British Empire had bombed Europe (especially Germany and robbing
it, cp. the robbed patents, knowledge, scientists and technicians
[by blackmailing them], and - amongst much others - territories
[cp. the forced displacement of about 20,000,000 Germans] and the
whole gold of the German Reich) the United States of America have
been bombing it with immigrants because thatt will weaken it sooner
or later. Why should we again defence the USA by sacrificing all
Many of those immigrants and many of the indigenous Europeans have
already built an alliance (a colored alliance that units
these very different humans because of the fact that they have the
same enemy) and try to continue and reinforce the so-called permanent
revolution by their terror, civil war. Why should
we tolerate or even accept that?
I think many of the people of the US and many other countries outside
from Europe do not know enough about Europe. And what they are told
by the media, is largely lie.
The Holy Roman Empire of German Nation lasted 1000 years - exactly
from 843 (treaty of Verdun) to 1806 (during the Napoleonic wars).
And b.t.w.: Metternich was not Austrian but German, he was born
in Koblenz; but that doesnt matter very much because Austria
had been a part of Germany until 1866 - and again from 1938 to 1945
as you probably know, for example: Hitler was an Austrian, he was
born in Braunau (Inn). Since the end of the Second World War the
Austrians have been confusing Metternich with Hitler ()
and saying Metternich was an Austrian and Hitler a German, although
the reverse is true.
There were more than one attempt in the European history to form
an European Union, and any time it was Germany that did the first
step. The EU we now have is a product of six countries: West-Germany,
France, Italy, Holland, Belgium, Luxemburg.
Earlier, in the end of the 19th and in the early 20th century the
German government and the German Kaiser Wilhelm II. were going to
build something like an European Union, then the First World War
startet and the hope was destroyed. Cui bono? The idea of an European
Union is good but it has to work. The current European Union doesnt
work well. So it has to be reformed - soon - or it is going to decay.
What the German government started at that time was almost the
same that Europe got later, after the two world wars, but it was
just the beginnig of the First World War that destroyed this European
Union, as if there were interests to prevent it (and such interests
existed, especially in England).
The German Hanse or other Städtebünde (associations of
cities in Germany and Italy) were the first attempts of creating
something like an European Union. The project of an European Union
has always had proponents and opponents. The last powerful European
opponent was the British Empire. No wonder that there was no possibility
for an European Union before the British Empire ended. The German
Empire was no European opponent but the most powerful proponent,
and - of course - the most powerful rival of the British Empire.
The profiteer of the rivalry between the British and the German
Empire was the USA - that is the reason why the Dollar Empire could
be formed. So the current most powerful European opponent is the
USA as a Dollar Empire, and merely other than economic unions with
the USA are no European opponents, for example the NATO. So the
NATO is important also for Europe; but again: I dont want
such an aggressive NATO, and I also dont want the hierarchical
structure the NATO has. We should reform the NATO, change it from
an aggressive and unilateral into a defending and multilateral military
Economy and military belong more together than many people believe.
Economy and military are very closely connected with each other.
Almost all wars have their causes in economy.
My thesis is: If the NATO partners are enemies, then the NATO
is either useless, or very schizophrenic, or both; so one of the
consequences must be the end of the NATO.
My opinion is: The occidental culture needs something like a military
alliance but not an aggressive one like the NATO. My opinion is
is not yet an ingredient of my thesis. If it were, then I could
not so easily speak about the end of the NATO as a consequence but
would suggest to reform the NATO in order to prevent the end of
Economy and military are very closely connected with each other
Will there be war in Europe before 2050? **
Yes, you don't have all the facts. After bombing Europe (especially
Germany and robbing it, cp. the robbed patents, knowledge, scientists
and technicians [by blackmailing them], and - amongst much others
- territories [cp. the forced displacement of about 20,000,000 Germans]
and the whole gold of the German Reich) you have been bombing it
with immigrants because (you know) that it will weaken it sooner
or later. Why should we again defence the USA by sacrificing all
The EU and the US are economical enemies (and that is something
different, isnt it?). And furthermore: Germany and the US
(as well as 99% of the world) are military enemies because
there is no peace treaty for the Second World War (cui bono?). This
all is absolutely schizophrenic but true. The historical facts do
not lie. Humans lie.
If we are not careful, we will soon experience a Third World War
or something like a civil war which is even beastlier than a world
The harbringers, the heralds are already everywhere, the agitators
are on their stage. Will there be war in Europe
before 2050? (**|**)
- that is my question, and sometimes I think I should have asked:
Will there be war in Europe before 2030?
The national parliaments have no power anymore because they have
given their power to the dictators of the EU. The problem is the
The main problem of the EU is the EU itself. The EU is a
dictatorship. Nobody is allowed to select the rulers of the EU.
They and the global bankers give the instructions and orders. Merkel
did not say that (for example) the Greek must have the Euro. She
tries to bind all countries of the Euro system and to extend the
EU. Not only to you but also to me, this is the wrong politics,
but who would do it in a different (perhaps: better) way than she
does? She is not mainly responsible for the guidelines and principles.
The EU and the bankers are mainly responsible for that. And if you
now say that she is lying in bed (**)
with them, then I can tell you that the other national politicians
of Europe are also lying in bed with them and do nothing else. The
EU problem is not mainly a national Problem, because the EU is not
a nation but an empire.
The EU is not part of the problem (**),
the EU is the problem!
Germany is stronger than Italy or France, even stronger than Italy
and France togehter. See, the problem is that the
economical and political power is not equally distributed. So the
most powerful one has to manage it. Okay, Germany should relax
a bit now (**),
but there is definitely no alternative - except the end of the Euro
system and probably even the end of the EU. Okay, as far as I'm
Okay, I don't want to take your illusions about Italy and France
away. But they are not able to do what you want them to do. And
what will happen after the end of the Euro or even the EU? I guess:
War! Maybe there will be war anyway. But I don't like wars, especially
civil wars. Maybe I will not experience it, but my children and
all the other occidental humans who are now young will probably
experience it, and I don't want them to experience it.
Maybe one of the more peaceful solutions which can lead to the
end of the Euro system or even to the end of the EU could be that
either Germany or France would leave the Euro system or even the
EU. France will not do it because its insolvency will soon lead
to war, probably civil war. Germany will not do it because the German
government as the enemy of the most German people will punish -
for example: jail - all those Germans, and then something like a
civil war will happen as well as it will in the case of France.
Maybe the best solution for the end of the Euro system or even the
end of the EU would be, if we started there where it currenly suffers:
at the Euro system. Greece should leave the Euro System, but that
would not be enough; some other countries should follow, for example
also Italy, and that would probably lead to a rethink in theheads
of the EU rulers. So, step by step, this could lead to the complete
end of the Euro system, and maybe to even more. At least, this would
be a more peaceful way than most of the other ways. But I guess
that the EU dictators will "help" those deserters,
thus - in reality - they will kill them.
Reportedly, there is a discussion about the division of the Euro
(€) into a North-Euro and a South-Euro. If the US (which are
similar to the EU anyway), Canada, and Mexico will divide their
Amero into a North Amero and a South Amero, then Mexico will have
to play the same role the countries of the probably coming South
Euro play in the case of the Euro.
In order to prevent or circumvent such a division, they will probably
implement the Globo. They will say: See, the Euro and the
Amero do not work, and therefore we need the Globo.
Before the Euro was established, it was known that the the
South Europeans would get problems with the Euro! Most humans do
not learn from history. That is the problem!
Do you think that humans do what history has taught them?
Mostly they do what others want them to do, regardless whether it
is reasonable or not.
The governments in Canada, USA, and Mexico will probably not reasonably
decide. They will decide what the real rulers want them to decide.
It is alomost a safe bet that the Amero will be established without
a general support, without a real majoritarian support.
Europeans averagely see guns all 70 or 80 years - when the rulers
bring their war to Europe.
I was told - many years ago - that two cities in the US with almost
the same number of inhabitants had very different criminal statistics
because they had different gun laws: one city had a very high crime
rate and a very strict / tight gun law, while the other city had
a low crime rate and a lax / slack gun law.
First of all, the reasons for wars to happen are always given just
because of the nature of living beings in general and of human beings
in particular. Secondly, econimical wars as several forms of extreme
competitions are typical for the modern humanity
and always accompanied by media wars (you can even see it here on
ILP). Thirdly, the kind of war I am most afraid of is the so-called
civil war, and this kind of war is what Europe will
probably have to face. The contradictional politics of and between
Europe and the USA are one of the main reasons why Europe will probably
have to face a civil war. I just said probably, thus
not certainly. But the probability is not low.
If you can't defeat your enemy economically, then defeat him
demographically. And if you will have defeated him demographically,
then it will soon be easy to defeat him economically too. This implies
the high probability of a civil war.
Again: I did not say that it is certain but merely probable that
there will be war in Europe before 2050.
By the way the current US debt:
US national debt: $ 18 320 000 000 000.
US debt per taxpayer $ 154 500.
US debt per citizen: $ 57 000.
US Debt Clock)
Destroy the motor of a car, and this car will not function anymoe.
Destroy Germany as the motor of the EU and the Eurozone, and the
EU and Eurozone will not function anymoe.
Since the wars in Central and Southwest Asia and in Africa that
are caused by the USA and Israel the number of immigrants in Germany
has increased gigantically.
Since the beginning of the huge problems in Greece Germany's debts
have also increased gigantically.
This obviously never ending demographical and economical war will
lead to the fact that the EU and Eurozone will not function anymoe.
And this can't be in the interest of all Europeans.
The NATO was formed as an alliance of defense, and now it has nothing
at all to do with defense but exclusively with aggression.
Yes, we already have humanism, thus: much more wars than ever before
and especially much more terrible / terroristic wars than ever before.
War has much to do with the market and is one of the most profitable
businesses, probably the most profitable business.
Did the US or the EU or the communist Merkel (CDU = Communistic
Dictatorship Union) herself already bring the war to Europe by letting
the islam-fascistic conquerers in?
The European fight modern military wars all around the world, but
they do it not on their own but in function of the USA as the leader
of the NATO. And the Europeans have been forgetting to defend Europe
for so long (too long?).
Fortress Europe, before it is too late.
Not some Euroapean nations but the whole Europe has lost the 31
years lasting World War (I and II). The US and the SU (Soviet Union)
have one it, but the latter lost the so-called Cold War
which the former won also. Now, the problem the US faces is similar
to the problem the US faced before the begin of the WW1 and before
the begin of the WW2. This similarities are very obvious. So we
will have war pretty soon.).
After having put all the european countries in deep red ink,
ECB blows €400billion on »Brexit Black Friday«
bank bailouts... and who is paying for this: taxpayers/consumers
who will see their purchasing power going down even more.
Who is paying for this? The German taxpayers - as always.
Europe has become too different and thus too problematic because
of the East-extension (May 2004). This was foreseeable because of
the European history.
But extension is something that no super-organism (the EU is such
a super-organism) can really refuse - politicians belittle this
by using the word practical constraint (Sachzwang).
So the EU has got a problem which has to do with overstretching.
It has been overstretched since the Euro and the East-expansion.
At the latest.
Europe has no chance to come together, if the poblems are not solved.
Again: The Holy Roman Empire of German Nation existed for
more than 1000 years. No other political entity has reached such
a great age - except the unholy Imperium Romanum that has reached
the same age.
Globalists are in Europe too. Europeans would have to become absolutely
capable of defending themselves and their whole territory. War is
lucrative, and many actors, especially the most powerful ones -
the Globalists -, know that they will benefit, become more powerful
or at least remain powerful.
So I guess that Europe will probably remain relatively passive
and weak, in an oddly awaiting position, then be coerced into war
pretty soon (at least long before 2050), and the result will be
a huge loss and a huge chaos. The beginning of it can alraedy be
seen (although many people do not want to see it, because they shall
not want to see it - which means that this first little circle is
complete, because the plan of the Globalists is reached again).
Islam's incorporation into Europe, as it is right now, is
too forced and quick, meaning that someone is pushing for war. (A
war which will benefit US). (**
). Yes. And it is also true that that war will benefit the US (like
other wars did before).
Life is the resistance to or struggle against entropy, and culture
is the resistance to or struggle against anarchy. Both can merely
be temporarily successful.
In the following video (**),
Helmuth Nyborg (**)
points out the clear relationship between distance from the equator
and both brain size and intelligence. At or close to the equator,
the average IQ is 69, whereas at a latitude of 54 degrees the average
IQ is 98. Nyborg observes that races could logically be classified
as eco-types (**),
since their traits reflect the ecological niches in which they evolved.
He also notes that unlike the North/South gradient in IQ there is
no East/West gradient, virtually proving that it is the challenges
of a cold climate that have forced northern peoples to evolve higher
intelligence and a greater capacity for cooperation. He points out
that e.g. Arabs have lower-than-expected IQs relative to the latitudes
in which they evolved, probably due to the dysgenic effects of frequent
Two forces could destroy the Western Civilization. One is a social
system that taxes the competent to subsidize the proliferation of
the incompetent. As Nyborg notes, the welfare-state debases
what created high civilization in the first place - this is the
first time in history that the less fit are reproducing more than
the more fit (**).
At the same time, lower-IQ non-Europeans are pouring into the continent,
bringing with them alien practices and religions. Nyborg concludes
with a warning: Unless Europeans are able to reverse these two trends,
the result could be the undoing of the Enlightenment - we
may be on the precipice of a new dark era (**).
My personal fear is that we face civil war. - Helmuth Nyborg
(cp. in the said video **).
I personally find that our children deserve a better future
than that .... - Helmuth Nyborg (cp. in the said video **).
I want to add something to Nyborgs statements in the said
where Nyborg notes that e.g. the welfare-state debases what
created high civilization in the first place - this is the first
time in history that the less fit are reproducing more than the
more fit (**).
We know from e.g. the schoolyard that high-IQ pupils and low-IQ
pupils behave very differently. The high-IQ pupils behave in a more
reasonable way and think that intelligence is the best way to get
success, whereas the low-IQ pupils behave in a more violent way
and think that violence is the only way to get success.
The behavior of the high-IQ pupils is very similar to the behavior
of the Faustians which Nyborg, referring to Charles Murrays
book Human accomplishment (2003), calls High Civilization
/ European Core / males born in a small area of
northern Europe (the entire area of the Germanic speaking
people and the north-northwest area of the Romanic speaking people
thus: the area where the Occidental culture (a.k.a.: Faustian culture)
originated with its soul (according to Spengler: die faustische
Seele [the Faustian soul]).
What Nyborg describes is a scientifically secured version of the
Faustian story / history.
Back to the schoolyard: Very often, the low-IQ pupils win against
the high-IQ pupils who are, in addition to that, often called Streber
(German) or nerd/geek (English). It depends
on the number: if low-IQ pupils are many more than the high-IQ pupils,
then the high-IQ pupils have no chance to win against the low-IQ
pupils. (Then proverbs come true: The
wiser head gives in. The cleverer give in.)
Politically said: By welfare and immigration politics, the welfare
states help the low-IQ people win against the high-IQ people. What
Spengler predicted as die farbige Weltrevolution ([**|**]
the colored world revolution [**|**])
has become reality since the end of the second world war or, at
the latest, since the end of the cold war. Very likely, this will
lead to a civil war, if not to more than a civil war.
The reason why many Faustian people are scared these days is a
real threat (!) - not the foreign race of the
immigrants or the sex or something like that.
The Thermodynamic Solar Irradiance Selection (TSIS) Hypothesis:
- The latitudinal reduction in Sun Irradiation and related carrying
capacity of cold eco-niches exposed the small bands of genetically
quite similar prehistoric northbound migrants to still harsher
selection for traits beneficial for survival.
- Among those traits are Brain Size, Intelligence, and Altruistic
Sociability, as they all favor in photon-poor, nutritionally bare
- Their heritability will leave modern-day artefacts in the form
of North-South gradients in IQ, Brain Size, and Altruistic Sociability.
1.) High Civilization reflects the geo-physics of Cold Ecotypes.
2.) It accordingly will receive little support in Warm Ecotype ereas.
3.) Warm Ecotypes cannot be integrated in modern technological European
and Western offshoot countries, except for the few at the high end
of the normal distribution of Warm Ecotypes. **
If Europeans become a minority, then intelligence (high IQs),
technology, science, wealthy, democracy, welfare become a minority
too, will drop below sustainable levels. All this means stupidness,
dark ages, eternal-civil-war-like situations or even the Stone Age
again, in the worst case the disappearance of all humans.
There is one main reason, all others are subordinated to it. This
one main reason is the decline of the West (cp. Spengler). The negative
demographic development, the said smarmy, smirky people in
managerial positions (**),
the said objective ... to weaken European power (**)
are some examples for the consequences of the decline of the West.
The weaker you are, the more blackmailable you are. Those who decide
to weaken European power (thus: German power) are mostly Europeans
or at least of European origin.
Europeans would resist this development, if they were politically
unified. But they are not politically unified. The more EU
and Euro they get, the less politically unified they
are. There are too many powerful people who want to weaken Europe.
So the political unification of Europe will probably never happen.
What will happen in Europe is a WAR (**)
in order to weaken Europe (thus: Germany). This was the result of
the both world wars too. Each result led to more European weakness.
Greetings from Carthage:
The globalistic phase will end in this or in the next century,
I guess, and before its end there will be a lot of terror attacks,
a lot of civil wars, wars with atom bomb explosions and other disasters.