Somebody thinks they might be part of a sleeper cell. From what I can tell their actions were not particularly sophisticated and it doesn't seem there was much of an exfil/ hiding out plan. That makes me think they were probably acting alone or with minimal support at some point but who knows. It will be more interesting as information trickles out over the coming weeks.
That the motivations are presumably fundamentalist Islam but they grew up in the US is troubling. If they had moved here 3-4 years ago it would be a bit easier to understand their radicalization. Guess as Highdesertlivin said this is why (or at least part of it anyway) we carry guns.
If you are looking for a used vehicle I strongly suggest consulting The best used vehicles for under $20,000 by consumer reports. We are probably going to be in the market for either Hyundai Accent with 50-60k miles or a Toyota Corolla with 70-90k on it once we get to the states. Hyunai's were a great deal 8-10 years ago but their prices have gone up a lot which ironically raised the price of the older used ones also. The Toyota is a lot more money but they last forever. Then again for 50% more money you can usually get a lot more car. We have some thinking to do on this one.
I got an email from the folks at Full Spectrum Dominance saying they are linking to us. They are a News Aggregator who pull in some really obscure stuff. Pretty cool if you've got the time. I will probably add it to my weekly news rotation.
I stumbled onto a topic floating around that concerns me called The Orkin Man. I wish people could finally realize that this plan doesn't work. It has repeated and failed way more times than Communism. Here is what happens: A bloodbath ensues, killing a bunch of elite's as well as a whole lot more of the wrong folks and just plain folks caught in the crossfire. This bloodbath is almost immediately followed by the people who did the killing becoming the new elite's. [Hint: the folks you want as leaders aren't the ones running around executing people wholesale or leading the mass murdering bloodbath executions.] With boring repetitiveness those new elite's are even worse than the old elite's. Those first folks may or may not not hold power but the ones who come next aren't much better. Reference the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, Mao's disaster in China, The Khimer Rouge and pretty much every revolution I can recall except the American one.
To end on a lighter note I stumbled into a site for Infantrymen called 11series.com. Got some half funny half motivational quotes off their FB page:
"Not saying your a whore, but baby if you were a range target you would be the 25m one."
"It's too hot to train said no taliban fighter ever in the history of the world."
"How many vets does it take to screw in a light bulb? You don't know man, you weren't there."
Got to love Vladmir Putin. He really is a bad mama jamma strait out of a Tom Clancy novel.
Not sure if this last one is an authentic old terribly un PC ad or a newly made terribly un pc ad. Regardless it is so steriotypical but with that shred of real life that is just great. Makes me think it is something Red from That 70's show would have said.
I spent the whole day writing at work so you all get pictures. Lots of things are in my head but I am totally wrote out.
That’s the trouble with you Americans, you expect nothing bad to ever happen when the rest of the world expects everything bad to happen, and they are not disappointed.
Svetlana on the Soprano’s
Craig and I agree on about 85% of things and argue like old women about the other 15%. We remind me of my friends Ryan and Chad that way. In any case I have got to thank him for something. I recently made a comment to a post on his blog. In his response he asked if I had read anything by Dimitri Orlov. I had heard of him but hadn’t really read anything. I got to thinking. Right before I came here I loaded my Kindle with a bunch of books; one of which was written by some dude with a Russian sounding name and was about the Soviet collapse. I checked and it was written by the fellow in question.
My friend Craig spurred me to get back to reading. I was really busy for the first months here but since we have collectively stopped trying to go 24/7 and slipped into a more maintainable pace and we have also became more efficient in things my spare time situation has gotten better. No real reason I haven’t been reading lately. I just kind of got out of the habit of it I guess. Well I am getting back into it and enjoying it. Reading will go a long way toward me doing the utmost I can to prepare while here. A lot of PT, a few purchases now and then and some financial preps aside that is about all I can do.
On the bright side that is worthwhile stuff to do. Some reading will really help round things out for me. I started the Orlov book and it is pretty interesting. There will be more to come on that later. Anyway I want to thank Craig for getting me back to reading.
This book discusses the Soviet collapse (loosely moving between the end of the USSR and their economic hyperinflationary collapse a few years later, more on this in a bit). It compares and contrasts what could be called the Soviet model with current and possible future events in America. In doing so the book looks at where we may be going. I read it on my kindle but am sure you can get it in a physical format if you so desire. Anyway let us get onto the usual format.
The Good: It was a quick, easy read. The author did a bang up job of speaking on complicated issues in clear language without jargon or scienceinese (the language scientists speak and none of the rest of us understand). Somebody smart once said that if you can’t explain an idea to an average man on the street then you do not really understand it. By that standard Dimitry Orlov really understands the themes and ideas that make up the subject matter for this book. For a nonfiction book it reads rather casually, part because of the clear simple language used and part because it is interwoven with stories of his experiences and anecdotal tales. In the closing comments he said (more of less) that he tried to keep it light and enjoyable and I would say he did a great job. The information on the Soviet economy and collapse was outstanding. Also the way it was written hit the man on the street angle as well as the bigger picture of what was happening. This balancing act was probably hard and he did a great job of it. I learned a lot about how the Soviet economy worked, failed to work and fell apart in this book.
The Bad: It is abundantly clear to me that the author looks at the Soviet union through some rose colored glasses. I don’t know a ton about the USSR/ Russia’s history but he seemed to have an awful positive memory. Furthermore I found him willing to sweep America with a broadly critical brush that is probably not deserved. The words “if you liked it so much then why didn’t you stay there” came to mind and maybe out of my mouth a few times. If he would have been glowing or rough to both sides it would have made a lot more sense. This almost discredited an otherwise quality book for me.
The author could not seem to make up his mind between talking about the fall of the USSR and the Russian economic collapse a few years later. Of course both events were linked but the way he talked about them flipping back and forth randomly was confusing and in my mind not particularly logical. I’m not sure if he was trying to pad the book a bit, in any case it was distracting.
The Ugly: At points I found the book to be full of contradictions. He can’t seem to decide if there is going to be an economic collapse and hyperinflation or if things are going to go all Mad Max and stick with one idea. Much of his claim rests on peak oil theory which is, while not as discredited as global warming, certainly a subject that could be debated. This goes back to the point before that the events he is claiming will or are happening do not seem to logically lead to the conclusion he goes to. Maybe my reading missed something.
More so than any comparable book (Kustner, FerFAL, etc) I found this to be depressingly low on concrete ideas to prepare for the scenario the author lays out. He mentions how you might want to buy some compact tangibles such as soap and razor blades and that having a home with a bit of land to grow a garden that is paid off is a good idea. Aside from a few vagaries the book is awful long on problem and short on solution. I’ve been told never to bring somebody a problem without an idea for a solution, apparently Dimitry Orlov hasn’t heard that one.
Now for some discussion in no particular order:
-One compelling and disturbing point was brought up. A significant reason the Russian economic collapse was so calm was that everyone’s residence was owned by the state so nobody got evicted. Sure they shared an apartment with a 12 member 3 generation family but at least they had a roof and walls that was not tied to any need for income. In America pretty much everyone’s residence is tied to a need for continued income, if just to pay the property taxes. That kept their homeless population to a real minimum which contributed a lot to stability. I do not know a lot of people in America who would still be in their home after a year or two if their savings/ investments were wiped away and their job lost. I am not sure what would happen if America had that sort of structurally high unemployment. However if our current situation is any indicator it would favor banksters and large residential property owners (who are typically quite well off) not average down on his luck Joe 6 pack. Massive homelessness would be a huge tragedy for a lot of people and cause significant instability. When people think (maybe accurately) that they have nothing to lose they are very dangerous.
- I think it is not possible to make a lot of comparison’s in an ‘apples to apples’ way because so much was going on in the USSR and Russia during that period. All of the events happening make direct cause and effect impossible in some cases, at least IMO. I would say a lot of the chaos and the rise of a massive criminal underworld was the result of communism or the wild west collapse of communism. Unless there are significant tariff’s, price controls or truly punitive taxes put into place I do not see the kind of massive underworld that appeared in Russia happening. There is no need to buy $25 soap from a sketchy dude in an alley when you can get it from the neighborhood store. The existence of a relatively free market and its inherent ability to adapt readily negates some points the author made.
- Also for a lot of reasons I do not see the kind of massive corruption that took place in Russia happening, it just is not part of our culture, well except maybe Dem’s in Illinois. I do believe we could fall a rung down the proverbial corruption ladder but not to where Russia was/ is.
-As for the idea of a lot of laws and regulations being almost removed by the default of non enforcement I am not so sure. Unfortunately I think the answer is that laws will stay on the books and either every once in awhile somebody will get hammered for running an unlicensed business, dodging taxes, etc. This is not a huge deal as the odds of it being you are low. Another possibility is that laws will just be enforced selectively based upon various personal and political motives. Given the way the pendulum has swung recently that would be bad for most people who read this blog, especially the ones who are publicly outspoken. That the New Black Panthers can openly and brazenly intimidate white voters with weapons and face no consequences but an active conservative type will get hammered for a parking ticket or the like could be seen as a glimpse into the future.
In closing I do think this book is worth reading even though it does have some rough spots. The info and background on the Russian collapse was very interesting and though provoking. Heck I would go as far as to say it is worth paying retail price for if you can’t borrow a copy.
The idea of massive food shortages in America is an interesting one. I think there are fallacies as well as misinformation in play. Also it would be naive to say there is not at least some some intentional fear mongering involved.
Food as a weapon is a scary thing. It has been used by brutal governments to force a region or group of people into submission in the one of the most inhumane and brutal fashions. To me it is scary because it intentionally targets the civilian population in a widespread and determined way. The history of it probably goes back as long as their have been organized groups of people big enough to communicate and act cohesively at regional and national levels. The British starved the Irish, the Afrikaners, Kenyan's and almost surely some other groups I have forgotten.
The Soviet communists under Stalin starved the Ukranian peasants in the early 30's. The idea of giving up their land and relying on 'the collective' to support them didn't appeal to these peasants very much. The Soviet troops and police took all of their food and blocked the importation or delivery of food aid to the region. Needless to say bad times ensued. Garden Serf wrote about this more. There is a video here that you can watch if so inclined.
Like I said before this is scary stuff and I don't think anybody can watch it without being profoundly effected. It will likely remind you of why you hate communists and make you want to stock up on food and ammo. These are generally good feelings to have so I won't argue against them.
This is however on the balance not a scenario which worries me particularly. It is somewhere towards the bottom of my list of concerns. It is in the neighborhood of a full on genuine Bosnia or Africa style civil war and above war with Canada or anything involving aliens. Though it is true that Americans tend to have (even those evil liberals) a much higher value for human life than some that isn't really the reason. I honestly think Stalin and Mao (or maybe the Illuminati and Trilateral comission) had a running bet on who could kill more of their population. While different cultures (for a lot of reasons) do tend to act in different ways however events can bring about rapid and crazy changes so in that respect all bets are off.
There are two primary reasons this scenario doesn't worry me much. The first is that privately owned firearms are so numerous and more importantly so widespread in America. It is difficult for Europeans or folks from a couple of large anti freedom cities to fathom just how many guns are out there in the hands of normal people. A hunting rifle with the 3 full 20 round boxes of ammo in the gun cabinet and the 4 random partial boxes spread all over or even a pistol in a nightstand with a single box of bullets are enough to cause real problems.
Even if the second ammendment was totally thrown out or ignored (as well as the rest of the Constitution) it simply would not be possible to confiscate anywhere near enough guns to make a difference. It is pretty obvious to me that well armed people are very difficult to forcibly starve into submission. Shooting would start long before that. I cannot say exactly how it would end but this alone would likely rule out such an outcome here, at least on a big scale.
The next issue is America's ratio of government security forces to citizens. Even if you count all military personnel, federal, state and local law enforcement as well as IRS agents, meter maids and dog catchers (and it would probably be unlikely that they would ALL choose to get involved, but lets just go with it as a worst case scenario) in America the numbers don't work. The ratio of citizens to what could (again a gross oversimplification) be called security personnel just doesn't add up. One of the reasons communist and other totalitarian governments have economic issues is that the ratio of security personnel to citizens is really high. It is really high because people don't like that kind of government. There are also significant budgeting and structural problems because such a high percentage of GDP and the state's budget goes to security. The ratio of people who would be trying to (violently or not) circumvent and bypass any such system to those trying to enforce it would lead to a lot of circumvention.
Food prices are an interesting thing. If you were going to try and specifically design an event to cause massive unrest it would be hard to beat food prices swinging to be either painful or out of the hands of the lower class. Short of a bunch of NeoNazis and the New Black Panthers both deciding to go to the same Waffle house at 2am after a night of hard partying I can't think of a better way to make some crazy stuff go down. While civil unrest is different than an insurgency or revolution one often proceeds the other. This sort of civil unrest has lead to more than one regime change. As I learned from this recent article it isn't so much long term gradual changes like inflation that cause these problems but short term volatile swings. I am not entirely sure why this is. It could be that people have more time to adapt to long term structural changes while someone in true 3rd world poverty can't pay 30, 40 or 50% more for food, even for awhile.
What does this mean for Americans? Well it is a good reminder to use alpha strategy type techniques to use money now to buy goods that will be more expensive later. That sort of strategy also lets you take advantage of good sales. If you have to buy, just for example, a can of baked beans for dinner tomorrow you're stuck paying full price. However if you have a dozen cans of baked beans (or 5 dozen) you can wait until there is a sale in a month and buy 6 cans on sale. Saving .30 cents a can on baked beans isn't a big deal in and of itself but if you do that with a significant percentage of foods you regularly (try for all shelf stable and frozen stuff) eat it will add up to real money.
The more I think about it the harder time I have with Americans who "can't afford food". Now don't get me wrong there are a few Americans with absolutely no income who can not in fact afford to buy anything to include food. However if you really look at the majority of Americans in that boat it is not in fact their situation. According to some reputable seeming website 80% of the worlds citizens live on less than $10 a day. I looked with as much percistence as it was worth to figure out the percentage of their income these folks spend on food and didn't find it. However it is accurate to say it is a pretty high percentage. I want to say more than 50%.
My observation about the Americans who say they cannot afford food is that while their budgeting priorities are fairly sound (unlike say rent food is a flexible part of your overall budget in that if you are flush it can be steak, shrimp and the best of everything; if things are tight it can be pancakes, rice and beans) their actual priorities are completely skewed. The thing is that while to a certain point your food budget can be flexible it is pretty darn important. In reality your actual priorities in order of importance are food, fuel/ energy, housing, insurance and then all that other stuff. While admittedly painting with a broad stroke Americans who are in this situation typically are spending their money on stupid stuff instead of buying food. I would personally like to open face slap everyone who smokes or drinks alcohol and then says they can't afford food. For heavens sake get your priorities strait. I like to have a drink as much as the next man, unless that man is Mel Gibson, but long before I couldn't feed my family I would be off the sauce.
I just don't see Americans who are one of the richest people on earth getting priced out of the food market at least in significant numbers. Even if the dollar and our standard of living drop significantly most Americans will be fine. According to something I read Americans spend a bit less than 10% of their income on food which is, if you look at world figures, rediculously low. If prices went up most Americans would cut something else out (entertainment, booze, whatever) or practice product substitution which is a fancy economist way to say buying cheaper stuff because the stuff you used to use got more expensive. It would be rough on the very bottom rung of society but the vast majority of Americans would still go to bed with full stomach's. My household spends 7% of our income on food including formula which is 1/4 of that. We could easily cut that by 1/4 if we didn't buy soda, the couple premade convenience foods we get as a luxury, and ate less meat. At subsistence levels with little meat or dairy we could probably spend 4% of our income on food including formula for Walker. We would eat a lot of oatmeal, pancakes, eggs, rice and beans but with some veggies and a little bit of meat now and then and a multi vitamin every day it would be fine for a long time.
So what food vulnerabilities do I see that should concern Americans? As I have said I am not worried about food being used as a weapon or getting priced out of the market. However the incredibly long supply chain between food producers and the end user coupled with JIT inventories is a pretty vulnerable system. A power outage here or a terrorist attack there or some bad weather can mess things up in a hurry. It doesn't take a couple days of trucks not being able to make deliveries and nobody will be able to buy anything.
To me the biggest concern about food security is disasters. A bad winter storm, earthquake or hurricane means the normal food supply is going to be disrupted. As we saw in Hurricane Katrina there is a very real possibility that a major regional disaster will put you on your own for weeks (I think 6 is an accurate number). The 72 hour kit that used to be suggested doesn't cut it. You need to be able to feed your family for a few weeks in case of that sort of event. If you are worried about a flu pandemic think in terms of months not weeks. A black swan event like an EMP or a successful NBC terrorist attack could disrupt all sorts of systems and supply chains for at least a couple years.
The great thing is that like most basic preps food is useful in a lot of scenarios. Assuming you buy things you actually eat worst case you can just eat the stuff. Rotate it by eating it and save a bunch because you can wait for sales. So in conclusion I think you should stock up on food, if just for different reasons than others do.
Yesterday we went to Praha (aka Prague). It was totally amazing. It is probably the most amazing city we have been to yet in Europe. Thanks to missing out on the large scale destruction other cities faced in WWII and then getting stuck behind the communist iron curtain for decades after the city is very well preserved. The food is great also. The beer is great. Thanks to a free market economy and not being on the Euro stuff is cheap. I got a nice beer stein as a souvenir for 25USD.
We drove there and spent the remainder of the day sight seeing. At about 8:30 we had a real nice dinner at a place near the castle. Headed back to our hotel from there. Woke up this morning and after a quick breakfast we did some more sight seeing. Spent the afternoon and evening driving back home. A couple staus and a bit of rain added hours to the trip. Really it was too long of a drive for a one night trip. I am pretty tired and Wifey though she lived the trip is totally done for.
That really doesn't have much to do with anything except that we did it and it was a lot of fun.
Interestingly enough my Great Grandfather spent some time in Afghanistan in (I think) the 1950's building roads. My inner cynic does however note that the photographs and information from the article are of a sort of brief renaissance period for the country. Also probably more significant the pictures and information only involve the major cities. By far the majority of the population of Afghanistan is rural and I am not convinced that their lifestyle has ever changed that much. Of course some minor technology has been introduced but the fundamental patterns of life seem to be more or less the same as they have forever.
Take away a bunch of rifles, a truck or two, some radios and maybe a generator or a small scale hydro and I tend to think that a little Afghan village is probably about the same as it was 100, 200 or 500 years ago.
I live in a duel currency world. I am paid in one currency and it isn't the currency of the country I live in. I routinely (if not constantly) carry 2 currencies and use them to buy goods and services in order to live my everyday life. Here are some random thoughts that come from these experiences.
This is one of the many things that Americans simply do not deal with. An American can live a normal life and just never come into contact with anything but good old US Dollars. America is a huge and powerful country. For a normal persons life in the US there (except paranoia or unorthodox financial transactions) is simply no need to hold anything but dollars.
Many Americans end up going on a trip here or there at some point, if just to Canada or Mexico. These people end up dealing in a foreign currency but often exclusively. They change the dollars they are going to spend on entertainment, dining and shopping into pesos or whatever and just use that currency for the duration of their stay. While dealing in a foreign currency is a novel experience it doesn't compare to dealing with two (or I guess more) currencies on a regular basis to conduct normal transactions.
People will not accept currency they are not used to. If they don't know what it looks like or what it is worth they will not take it. Businesses will deal with currencies that pop up regularly in the hands of intended customers, well that and the owners know what it looks like and is worth. I recall a few years ago some TV blip about how the Dollar was dying (long before the Sub Prime mess) because some trendy shops in NYC were accepting Euro's. A big part of why it made the news was that there were trendy wanna be European (it is a sort of East Coast thing I think) Wankers involved. A more practical example would be a city near the border with Mexico or Canada accepting their currencies or a store in an area with a large immigrant population accepting that currency. Also the theme of a business accepting currency that they know the look and value of which shows up repeatedly continues. In my immediate area a good percentage of businesses will accept dollars, of course as well as euro's. If I drove 25 miles to a little random village they would only accept euro's.
While a wad of "stable" currency could be valuable as an inflation hedge don't necessarily expect the local grocer in Peduke, Iowa or Andersonville, Texas to accept Swiss Franks or Australian Dollars or whatever. If the local currency goes to heck in a hand basket some people may learn more about different kinds of currency. Often people end up using a precious metals shop/ money changer to convert their currency into local money at the current exchange rate to buy whatever they need.
The biggest thing you need to live successfully in a dual currency world is the ability to rapidly make fairly accurate calculations between currencies. This means knowing what the exchange rate is and being able to do some math rapidly. Unless it is making huge shifts don't worry about this one too much the goal is to put the cost of a service or item into terms you can work with. Think about it like converting metric to standard or whatever. Really for average personal transactions a pretty accurate figure is good enough. To put that into perspective 2 percent on a hundred dollar purchase is 2 dollars. When you talk about transactions in thousands or tens of thousands of dollars or more a 2 percent difference matters but for a round of drinks or dinner or such it really doesn't.
You just need to be able to do this to know if a given price is good or too much.
What I am describing is a (relatively) free market scenario. Anybody inclined to do so can carry whatever kind of currency they want. Only my resources, desire and ability to find random currencies limits what I can carry or hold. The key is to see what value you are exchanging for a given good or service. Does it really matter if I pay ten dollars or about 7.60 E for a given item? No it does not because they are worth the same.
The same could be said about precious metals. Does it really matter if you pay for something with $340 or a quarter ounce of gold (lets say the value is the same, I know it is close)? No it doesn't.
Where things get downright crazy is when the system is strongly regulated by a government, go figure! Governments with a weak or essentially worthless currency often try to keep their currency alive through price and wage controls. Also it might not suprise you but this doesn't work real well. At best it works in the most utterly authoritarian and isolated regimes like the former USSR which was also big and resource rich enough to be able to manufacture (at least junk versions) of most things they need. These governments will find a way to trade for essential items they can not produce nationally. Following typical authoritarian priorities this means fancy cars and luxurious stuff for the elites and things to keep the military running to hold down their unhappy population. Not much else gets imported because go figure an appliance plant in a place that doesn't suck has no interest in their worthless currency.
Also these countries at least try to limit possession of and transactions in other more stable currencies or precious metals. Part of this is Gresham's Law but the bigger issue is (official) exchange rates not being equitable. Getting back to my free market example for a minute. If a nice dinner at a little restaurant/ bar/ hotel costs the equivalent of 10 euro's or 13 dollars (or lets say a half ounce of silver) and I can easily trade between the three at the current honest rate I just pay with whatever is most convenient. Now back to a sucky (generally socialist) country. Their currency is valued way too high. The "official" exchange rate is a joke. Often these governments will (with varying degrees of success) restrict or outright ban the possession of other currencies.
I think somebody said once that when the free market becomes criminalized then criminals will run the free market. People will find a way to smuggle in goods that are otherwise rationed or unavailable (to the non elites). Authoritarian Communist regimes are big on security of their borders. Despite their propaganda it is really more about keeping their people from leaving than anybody from invading.
The thing is that authoritarian communist regimes conscript a large amount of their force and pay is generally quite poor. So unmotivated poorly paid people guard their borders. While I have zero sympathy for corruption in military and government of non sucky countries I understand why it exists in sucky ones.
If I had an equivalent job in a sucky socialist country with price controls I might well be put on border guard. I would likely be in charge of some random intersection and the land around it. I would be poorly paid and my men would be paid worse. If an enterprising individual wanted to bring a truck of black market items across that checkpoint and wanted to make a deal I would be sympathetic. I would get some cash and my guys on guard would get a bottle of Jack Daniels or a carton of Marlboro's or some Levis or whatever. Would we stop spies or shoot at invaders, of course, but a little black market action is another matter.
Sucky authoritarian communist countries have black markets to varying degrees. People smuggle stuff in or steal stuff from work or whatever and trade it. In more extreme cases the local currency might not even be accepted there, but if you have something they want you can trade. Many average and poor people are stuck out of this market in its most narrow meaning because they do not have access to other currency. They may however have a skill or some stuff they snagged from work to swap with a neighbor who works at a place that makes something they need.
This sort of duel currency world is infinitely more complicated. It is often impossible to trade the local currency for a more valuable one. It is often illegal (if just poorly enforced) to possess other currencies or precious metals. Instead of just going to a store and getting what you need it can be a pain.
In conclusion. If you can afford it having a percentage of your resources in an alternate currency or precious metals makes sense. Knowing the value of different currencies and precious metals is prudent. It is essential to be able to rapidly figure out the real cost of goods and services.
A Message to the People of the United States of America
Date: 1998
I send this message to you today on behalf of the freedom and peace-loving people of Afghanistan, the Mujahedeen freedom fighters who resisted and defeated Soviet communism, the men and women who are still resisting oppression and foreign hegemony and, in the name of more than one and a half million Afghan martyrs who sacrificed their lives to uphold some of the same values and ideals shared by most Americans and Afghans alike. This is a crucial and unique moment in the history of Afghanistan and the world, a time when Afghanistan has crossed yet another threshold and is entering a new stage of struggle and resistance for its survival as a free nation and independent state.
I have spent the past 20 years, most of my youth and adult life, alongside my compatriots, at the service of the Afghan nation, fighting an uphill battle to preserve our freedom, independence, right to self-determination and dignity. Afghans fought for God and country, sometime alone, at other times with the support of the international community. Against all odds, we, meaning the free world and Afghans, halted and checkmated Soviet expansionism a decade ago. But the embattled people of my country did not savor the fruits of victory. Instead they were thrust in a whirlwind of foreign intrigue, deception, great-gamesmanship and internal strife. Our country and our noble people were brutalized, the victims of misplaced greed, hegemonic designs and ignorance. We Afghans erred too. Our shortcomings were as a result of political innocence, inexperience, vulnerability, victimization, bickering and inflated egos. But by no means does this justify what some of our so-called Cold War allies did to undermine this just victory and unleash their diabolical plans to destroy and subjugate Afghanistan.
Today, the world clearly sees and feels the results of such misguided and evil deeds. South-Central Asia is in turmoil, some countries on the brink of war. Illegal drug production, terrorist activities and planning are on the rise. Ethnic and religiously-motivated mass murders and forced displacements are taking place, and the most basic human and women's rights are shamelessly violated. The country has gradually been occupied by fanatics, extremists, terrorists, mercenaries, drug Mafias and professional murderers. One faction, the Taliban, which by no means rightly represents Islam, Afghanistan or our centuries-old cultural heritage, has with direct foreign assistance exacerbated this explosive situation. They are unyielding and unwilling to talk or reach a compromise with any other Afghan side.
Unfortunately, this dark accomplishment could not have materialized without the direct support and involvement of influential governmental and non-governmental circles in Pakistan. Aside from receiving military logistics, fuel and arms from Pakistan, our intelligence reports indicate that more than 28,000 Pakistani citizens, including paramilitary personnel and military advisers are part of the Taliban occupation forces in various parts of Afghanistan. We currently hold more than 500 Pakistani citizens including military personnel in our POW camps. Three major concerns - namely terrorism, drugs and human rights - originate from Taliban-held areas but areinstigated from Pakistan, thus forming the inter-connecting angles of an evil triangle. For many Afghans, regardless of ethnicity or religion, Afghanistan, for the second time in one decade, is once again an occupied country.
Let me correct a few fallacies that are propagated by Taliban backers and their lobbies around the world. This situation over the short and long-run, even in case of total control by the Taliban, will not be to anyone's interest. It will not result in stability, peace and prosperity in the region. The people of Afghanistan will not accept such a repressive regime. Regional countries will never feel secure and safe. Resistance will not end in Afghanistan, but will take on a new national dimension, encompassing all Afghan ethnic and social strata.
The goal is clear. Afghans want to regain their right to self-determination through a democratic or traditional mechanism acceptable to our people. No one group, faction or individual has the right to dictate or impose its will by force or proxy on others. But first, the obstacles have to be overcome, the war has to end, just peace established and a transitional administration set up to move us toward a representative government.
We are willing to move toward this noble goal. We consider this as part of our duty to defend humanity against the scourge of intolerance, violence and fanaticism. But the international community and the democracies of the world should not waste any valuable time, and instead play their critical role to assist in any way possible the valiant people of Afghanistan overcome the obstacles that exist on the path to freedom, peace, stability and prosperity.
Effective pressure should be exerted on those countries who stand against the aspirations of the people of Afghanistan. I urge you to engage in constructive and substantive discussions with our representatives and all Afghans who can and want to be part of a broad consensus for peace and freedom for Afghanistan.
With all due respect and my best wishes for the government and people of the United States,
Ahmad Shah Massoud.
Most of my readers do not need any more reasons to prepare. Their heads are constantly filled with various threats and what they can do to mitigate them. For a few folks who are either more towards the liberterian or gun side of the house, as well as the elusive armchair survivalist, a bit of a nudge might be needed.
I think there have been survivalists in some form or another for ever. Back when people lived differently they were just a person with a bit more food, equipment and weapons than the norm. In the Cold War bomb shelters were the cool thing to do. There was a brief lull after the commies went broke and suddenly became very enthusiastic capitalists.
In the last decade I can think of 3 big reasons to get prepared.
The first was September 11th, 2001. The end of the Cold War brought a tense and potentially very dangerous situation to an end. However when that tense situation ended it was replaced with a very chaotic and in some ways far more dangerous one. [A sane if hostile neighbor with a rack full of guns really isn't a threat because they want to keep life going on. However a crackhead with a razor knife might do something crazy.] By and large that chaos and danger was kept to people in 3rd world counties killing each other. While a revolution here or a civil war there might bother someone that keeps track of international news or worries about random people they will never meet it doesn't affect your life in Omaha or whatever. There were certainly signs that September 11th was coming but like all things it is a bit easier in hindsight.
On September 11th 2,974 Americans died. Terrorism struck America for real. Not some criminal with vague revolutionist leanings but legitimate and serious terrorists. It was a big deal, I don't think I need to tell you that.
Lots of people got scared. People bought guns, stored food, water and all that. Some would say that their risk is next to nothing because they live in a remote or less populated area. To a certain degree I would agree with that theory. In my home town 6 military aged Arab national males would stick out like a sore thumb. It would be 50/50 if they could manage to shoplift gum from the grocery store, let alone some larger more nefarious thought. However I would submit to those people that some risk likely exists. Over the course of a year most people get on a plane, or go to see a pro sports game or take the wife to the big city to do some shopping, attend a business conference, etc. It doesn't matter if you spend 364 days a year working at your isolated retreat if you happen to be shopping at a mall (or whatever) on the day a bomb goes off.
So depending on your location and lifestyle there is at least a small risk you could be caught in a terrorist attack.
Hurricane Katrina made august 2005 pretty darn interesting. No point in whipping a dead horse but the government and emergency response was depressingly lacking. Katrina made it explicitly and painfully clear that if there is a significant regional disaster you're going to have to fend for yourself. It was really Welcome to the Jungle time. More than any other single factor Katrina pushed me into preparedness.
Probably more interesting than how crazy NO and the region got was how long it took for real organized relief efforts to get on the scene and provide logistical support (food, water, ice, medical). The old and fairly accurate advice that several days of food and water was plenty got tossed out the window. Four to six weeks is probably more reasonable. [Not suggesting to only prepare for that parse. If nothing else charity would be a reason to store additional food.] Also some people ended up firing a lot of warning shots. The legal and tactical use of warning shots is another discussion but lets just say that 25-50 rounds of ammo for the pistol/shotgun/ whatever would not give me a warm and fuzzy.
So depending on your location and lifestyle there is at least a small risk you could be caught in a terrorist attack. Some regions, like say the Southern Atlantic and Gulf Coast and in particular areas there below sea level are more dangerous than others. However all regions are prone to some disaster or disasters. If these disasters are major and on a large scale you could be on your own for weeks instead of days.
The Subprime Mortgage Crisis and consequent worldwide economic downturn was a huge event. There have been booms and busts forever. When cave men were living as hunter gatherers they had booms and busts of roots and woolly mammoth meat. In any case I got two meaningful things out of this whole mess. First for awhile there it looked like there was a real chance our entire financial system would collapse. Of course it didn't but if things had gone a slightly different way.... Second and to me more significant it was a big fat reminder that events far and removed from you can radically change your life. Even if you didn't own any derivatives the value of your 401k probably took a big hit. Maybe you don't have an adjustable rate mortgage but the value of your home almost surely changed. If you don't own a home or stocks but lost your job because of the overall economic downturn it sure affected your life.
So depending on your location and lifestyle there is at least a small risk you could be caught in a terrorist attack. Some regions, like say the Southern Atlantic and Gulf Coast and in particular areas there below sea level are more dangerous than others. However all regions are prone to some disaster or disasters. If these disasters are major and on a large scale you could be on your own for weeks instead of days. Also our current financial system is pretty fragile and events that are far and removed from you (sub primes were only huge in a few states) may dramatically affect your life. Still need a reason to prepare.
I talk a lot about ways I prepare. The fact that I choose to put my time/ money and energy there says pretty clearly they are the ways I see as most prudent. Take my advice and adapt it to suit your unique situation or just round file it, I truly don't care. However the world is a wild and crazy place. All indications show that it is going to get wilder and crazier for the foreseeable future.
Take some steps to prepare for whatever may come in order to best take care of yourself and your family no matter what comes.
"The only reason,and it is the only reason for a gun registration is to confiscate said guns at a later time. The Soviets did it, the Nazis did it, the Chairman Mao did it. And we all known how those turned out. Gulags,ovens, and mass starvation." -Conservative Scalawag
Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics - Henry Hazlitt $8.47 - Quantity: 1 - In Stock
Condition: Used - Very Good
Sold by: Senyah Management Inc
The Soviet-Afghan War: How a Superpower Fought and Lost - Michael A. Gress $12.21 - Quantity: 1 - In Stock
Condition: New
Sold by: Amazon.com, LLC
World Made by Hand: A Novel - James Howard Kunstler $10.08 - Quantity: 1 - In Stock
Condition: New
Sold by: Amazon.com, LLC
The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse - Fernando Ferfal Aguirre $24.95 - Quantity: 1 - In Stock
Condition: New
Sold by: Amazon.com, LLC
I ordered this book to help me get going with the Grundig 350DL. However because of amazons eccentricities it got here a bit late for that goal. By the time it arrived the antenna had been here for awhile and I had the radio grounded and working well. Anyway I got to reading this book today.
I ended up buying the 2008 version because at that time it is what was available. I don't think it matters much though. It started out with an interesting discussion about radio stations in Tangier. It then went into a great Getting Started section which I wish I could have read the day I got the radio. Then it got into a long series if reviews on seemingly every radio in existence. After the reviews it goes into a comprehensive listing of radio stations by time, country and frequency. That alone is well worth the price of the book. In any situation where I need this radio to get information it will be either going to be scanning the airwaves blindly or with grid down records already on hand.
It touches on some interesting themes. First of all world band radio is one of the most free form of long distance communication out there. World band broadcasts travel (under the right conditions) enormous distances. This makes it popular for areas that are so massive that AM and FM stations are not a viable option. It has an interesting history of being used to get information into areas with oppressive governments most notably during the cold war. However still today Cuba, China and a few other countries try to prevent free listening. These frequencies are less susceptible to radio jamming than other bands.In a lot of ways Ham/ SW aka world band have been replaced by the internet. However there is the huge bonus that the input for your radio comes from the sky, not a bunch of cables running through the ground. It is impossible to monitor what someone listens to on the waves.
Also I stumbled into the wikipedia article on numbers stations. I stumbled onto one of these some time ago. After about 5 minutes of listening it was pretty darn obvious what it was and since it did nothing for me I moved on. Sort of cool to know a bit more background though. I will open this book again before purchasing any sort of radio gadgets.
Guess I sort of mucked up the usual good bad and ugly format. Oh well.
In any case I would suggest this book for anyone who is getting into world band radio.
I love the photos and captions - esp. the one about the fighter plane. Keep 'em coming. Since my eldest got out of the Army a few years ago, we've been a little short of military humor.
Now a question - I dont really expect you to know this answer, but no one else I've asked has had one for me. Maybe you know someone you could ask.
Anyway - the scenario:
The Govt decides to devalue the dollar. We wake up one morning and we are told that we have to turn in all our Federal Reserve notes and we will be issued new currency at a, say, 2:1 ratio. That is, we turn in two dollars and get one dollar in new currency back, or a 50 percent reduction in buying power. (This is pretty much what happened to the people in North Korea recently and it didn't turn out well.)
What happens to all the coins we've stashed? (I heard that when this happens, the govt pretty much ignores coins because few people have more than a small stash on their dresser or in their pockets or something.)
What happens to govt pensions? Say Im a retired fed getting $2K a month. Do I now get $1K or do I get $2K in new money? Since it is directly deposited, it's all ones and zeros anyway until I cash it out.
What about Medicare or Social Security recipients? Are their payments cut in half or just converted to new money in cash? How would this affect their debit card system?
What happens to fixed mortgages? Do they stay the same amount and you just have to pay them in new money? Or, since you had to turn in your old money, did that magically cut your mortgage in half, too? Remember, you have a contract with the bank on the mortgage.
I know how it affected other countries (like Argentina - ferFal wrote about it a lot), but that isn't quite the same, because the conversion was based on the money's relationship to the dollar. I.e., the peso went from 1 peso to one dollar, to 3 pesos to one dollar. That just resulted in basic, ordinary. crappy inflation.
What do you do when it's dollar to dollar?
Do you think the Fed will just use inflation as it's Tool of the Month, rather than actually devalue and reissue the currency? There has been a lot of discussion on the doomer blogs about the govt already having different colored money stashed for such an emergency....In fact, one of the storage facilities is supposed to be a big building down the road from where I live. We know what it REALLY is (nyahaha).
Thanks for your thoughts.
SaddleTramp
TOR here: I think Saddle Tramp wins the award for the hardest question. Usually reader questions are hitting from a T easy but this one is a real fast ball. Anyway first I think it is important to say that nobody knows what could actually happen. We are talking about a very complicated scenario. The best we can do is to look at what has happened and our knowledge of America to make some informed guesses.
First of all I think we need to look at how currency devaluations work. I would say that currency devaluations are more of a desperate last stand than an intentional plan. Basically due to government overspending usually on a large military or various welfare programs (sound a bit familiar?) the government can't bring in as much as it is spending so they borrow and print. Inflation starts getting really bad and the currency becomes close to worthless or entirely worthless. The government then comes out and says that they made some mistakes blah blah blah and in order to address this crisis they are going to re issue the currency. It would be more likely that a New Dollar/ Blue Buck/ Amero/ Whatever would be issued and we could change in our old and close to worthless dollars at a fixed exchange rate. Governments do not do this unless things are really out of control. I imagine an exchange rate more like 10 or even 100 to 1 would be likely.
For various South American nations (they pretty much all did it at some point) this devaluation usually meant changing how their currency was pegged to the dollar. I am sure if this happened in America some theoretical "we are adjusting the value to get more in line with current world blah blah blah" stuff would be said. However that doesn't matter. What matters is that overnight you lose a zero or two off your cash savings. Governments say that in theory the new currency is worth more (and at the official exchange rate it is) but it never seems to quite work that way. In reality the new currency isn't worth much more than the old one and you have a lot less of it. Either the free market values the currency where it should be (lower than the government values it) or we all of a sudden have price controls. People have their life savings destroyed overnight.
As for coins. If I recall in Zimbabwe they did not re issue new coins so people were searching to find old Zimbabwean piggy banks and coffee cups (or whatever the cultural equivalent is) full of them. Either coins would be re issued or they would not, really it is anybodies guess.
When it comes to pensions. It is worth noting that hyperinflation and currency devaluation are wild and crazy times. Some people get totally screwed and other groups manage to get an OK deal with little rhyme or reason except their influence with those in charge. Congress and a couple of other influential groups might be able to wrangle a discrete but comfortable deal but most folks would likely get whatever the official rate is or lose their pensions entirely.
To be honest this is really the only scenario where middle age and retired (but not yet feeble) people are in a worse spot than the young. In general assuming they have made good choices middle aged and retired folks have had decades to build skills, store deep stores of supplies, maybe set up a nice retreat and become financially stable. However these folks are far more vulnerable to a hyper inflationary/ currency devaluation scenario because they do not have time to recover. As a 20 something a currency devaluation would suck for me for a few years as I would lose savings but I have 30+ working years to get into a good spot. However for my Father it would hurt a lot. He would seriously need to re reevaluate in what sort of lifestyle, when and even if he could retire at all. For my Grandmother the picture is even worse. She would be OK but she has significant savings in addition to her pension and some real estate but that is not where most people retire. For a person who relies on that check in the mail every month having it be worth far less is a serious problem.
I would say the people who fare the worst are those on a fixed income (well except those who get killed in the protests/ riots and increased crime rates but in the big picture that group is usually fairly small). Remember the pictures of old Russian women sitting in the street begging? They were doing this because the check they got every month was at the official exchange rate which doesn't reflect reality (unless there are price controls but that is a whole different mess) and probably couldn't feed them for a week, let alone the whole month. I can not express what an ugly situation this is for people on a fixed income. Their savings are gone and the check they get every month (assuming they even still get it) buys far less than it used to.
In terms of America I imagine Social Security would stay around as it is called the 3rd rail of politics with a very good reason. However the checks old folks get wouldn't buy much of anything because after being converted to the new currency and adjusted for the official exchange rate they would be a small fraction of what they are now.
Likely Medicare would just become underfunded and really dysfunctional. People would get health care coverage but good luck finding a Doctor or getting an appointment. Far more scrutiny would be put on all but the most basic procedures and don't even think about seeing a specialist.
As for fixed rate debt such as mortgages. The conventional wisdom is that your mortgage would just become really cheap which would be cool. Under this theory a mortgage for 150,000 dollars would go to 15,000 Blue Bucks. However as I mentioned above this sort of climate is a wild and crazy time. All contracts would have to be changed to reflect the new currency. Groups with influence can get a paragraph put into one of the numerous pieces of legislation which would be flying through our legislatures to protect their interests. Bankers as an industry have a huge amount of influence and they sure fared pretty well through our most recent troubles. Some sort of exception which made mortgages or other debt be converted at a preferential rate or converted fixed rate debt to have an inflation index is possible.
Our money supply has grown a lot recently but we are a huge economy and a very powerful nation. When the economy starts to recover and all this newly created money starts moving through the system we will have inflation. I think it is worth noting that hyperinflation is ruinously high inflation. There is no precise numerical definition to hyperinflation but 50% a month is a number lots of folks seems to use. It is just a question of when we shift away from the current trend of massive deficits. When the economy starts moving again interest rates could be raised to shrink the monetary supply and get inflation under control.
As for what I think is going to happen. The situation I see as most realistic is that the economy starts moving again at some point at least a year from now, probably 2-5 years off. We start to see inflation rear its head and sooner or later our government will decide to deal with it. They will want to do something gradual in order to not totally slow the recovery and it will take awhile for it to get to the point where it will work. Likely that critical mass will be a couple percentage points higher than anybody would like. I see double digit inflation as very probable and late 70's/ early 80's era inflation around 20% as realistic. However if we continue running at massive deficits which grow the money supply the situation could well be worse than that.
Hopefully this at least gives you an idea of my thoughts on this rather complicated question and a bit of food for thought.
Discussion on my post a couple days ago made me feel like expounding on something. At work we do risk assessments. [To be honest they are almost always a bunch of BS. For example lots of people die in vehicle accidents, mostly because they are tired and have been driving for too long. Instead we create "controls" like radio checks and assistant drivers instead of actually making sure the drivers get a good nights sleep and have them switch out or split real long non mission essential (say 3rd ID's march to Baghdad) drives into more realistic and manageable sections. Anyway tangent finished.] Anyway what is important is to consider not just how severe the impact of a certain scenario would be, but HOW LIKELY IT IS. The chart below is a good visual for this.
The values for likelihood are pretty easy to conceptualize. You could define the values for severity/ impact in pretty much any logical way. In terms of physical injuries I would say minimal would be something that could be fully treated by a normal person with a modest first aid kit. Minor might be something requiring medical attention, say a few stitches or a sprained ankle. Major could be needing hospitalization. Serious might be limb or eyesight and catastrophic would be death. Follow where I am going.
So lets get back to that hurricane. If you live in the coastal south east a hurricane is a highly likely scenario. If you live in Colorado a hurricane is extremely improbable.
A flat tire is probably a minimal impact (unless you are ill equipped and on a lonely road during a blizzard) but it is a near certainty. I imagine over the course of most peoples lives they will have at least a few flat tires. Thus to that guy living in Colorado it makes sense to prepare more for a flat tire than a hurricane even though the impact of a hurricane would be major (of course it would vary by hurricane and how those individuals fare in it but just go with me) and the impact of the flat tire would be minimal.
Getting struck by lightning would really suck. Unless you make a habit of standing on top of really tall stuff or waving around metal poles in open fields during lightning storms the likelihood of getting struck by lightning is extremely improbable. Thus there isn't much reason to worry about getting struck by lightning.
To me it makes sense to look at how likely a situation is and how severe the impact would be when figuring out what scenarios to allocate our time and resources towards preparing for. This is why I see something like say, a financial emergency or a robbery/ home invasion as more pressing than Zimbabwe style hyperinflation or those Russian troops the UN has secretly been sneaking into the US coming to your neighborhood to enforce the edicts of the UN/ Trilateral Commission/ Illuminati/ Bildenberg's.
Posts
