This is Part 2 of a four-part series on Elon Musk’s companies. For an explanation of why this series is happening and how Musk is involved, start with Part 1.
A Wait But Why post can be a few different things. One type of WBW post is the “let’s just take this whole topic and really actually get to the bottom of it so we can all completely get it from here forward.” The ideal topic for that kind of post is one that’s really important to our lives, and that tends to come up a lot, but that’s also hugely complex and confusing, often controversial with differing information coming out of different mouths, and that ends up leaving a lot of people feeling like they don’t totally get it as well as they “should.”
The way I approach a post like that is I’ll start with the surface of the topic and ask myself what I don’t fully get—I look for those foggy spots in the story where when someone mentions it or it comes up in an article I’m reading, my mind kind of glazes over with a combination of “ugh it’s that icky term again nah go away” and “ew the adults are saying that adult thing again and I’m seven so I don’t actually understand what they’re talking about.” Then I’ll get reading about those foggy spots—but as I clear away fog from the surface, I often find more fog underneath. So then I research that new fog, and again, often come across other fog even further down. My perfectionism kicks in and I end up refusing to stop going down the rabbit hole until I hit the floor.
For example, I kind of got the Iraq situation, but there was a lot of fog there too—so when I wrote a post about it, one fog-clearing rabbit hole took me all the way back to Muhammad in 570AD. That was the floor. Digging into another part of the story brought me to the end of World War I. Another brought me to the founding of ISIS.
Hitting the floor is a great feeling and makes me realize that the adults weren’t actually saying anything that complicated or icky after all. And when I come across that topic again, it’s fun now, because I get it and I can nod with a serious face on and be like, “Yes, interest rates are problematic” like a real person.
I’ve heard people compare knowledge of a topic to a tree. If you don’t fully get it, it’s like a tree in your head with no trunk—and without a trunk, when you learn something new about the topic—a new branch or leaf of the tree—there’s nothing for it to hang onto, so it just falls away. By clearing out fog all the way to the bottom, I build a tree trunk in my head, and from then on, all new information can hold on, which makes that topic forever more interesting and productive to learn about. And what I usually find is that so many of the topics I’ve pegged as “boring” in my head are actually just foggy to me—like watching episode 17 of a great show, which would be boring if you didn’t have the tree trunk of the back story and characters in place.
So when it was time to start what I had labeled in my head as “the Tesla post,” I knew this was going to be one of those posts. To understand if and why Tesla Motors matters, you have to understand both the story of cars and the story of energy—two worlds I somehow am simultaneously confused by and tremendously sick of. Just hearing someone say “climate change” or “energy crisis” or “tailpipe emissions” makes me kind of gag at this point—just too much politics, too many annoying people, too much misinformation on all sides, and it’s just hard to know how much I actually care and if there can be a solution to all of it anyway. So I did what I do when my tortoise shits when I’m out of the apartment and then spends hours walking through it and tracking it across everything, including the walls somehow—I rolled up my sleeves, took a deep breath, whispered, “Be a man, Tim,” and started scraping through layers of shit. If I have to live in a world with people arguing constantly about energy and oil and greenhouse gases and incentive programs, I might as well build myself a proper tree trunk.
After weeks of reading and asking questions and writing, I’ve emerged from the tortoise sewage with something that toes the line between a long blog post and a short book. I could have broken this into multiple posts, but it’s all one story and I wanted to keep it all together. It’ll be a bit of a time investment, but I think you’ll come out of it with a sturdier tree trunk about all of this than you have now. And as it turns out, when it comes to this topic, we may be witnessing a very awesome moment in history without quite realizing it yet.
The recent arrival of the Russian Marines and Air Force to the Syrian port-city of Tartous has generated a significant amount of interest around the world, as the possibility of Russia’s direct military intervention becomes the focal point of the war on ISIS. To add to Russia piling up its military strength in Syria, on Tuesday morning, a Chinese naval vessel traveled through Egypt’s Suez Canal to enter the Mediterranean Sea, scheduled to arrive in the coming weeks (6 weeks) to the port-city of Tartous in Syria that will join the Russian presence in Syria. And, to add more salt to Obama’s injury, Russia is now getting militarily involved, not just in Syria, but also in Iraq, as it moved, without radar detection, 24 attack jets from bases in Russia through Iran before traveling into Iraq.
Putin will show he means business with the air strikes on ISIS, which began earlier this week and which were accompanied by ground attacks near the Kweiris air base in the east of Aleppo province, where government troops have long been surrounded by ISIS, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.
Vladimir Putin‘s explicit promise to go ahead with airstrikes against terrorist targets in Syria with or without the help of the US effectively marks the end of Washington’s years-old effort to destabilize and ultimately remove the Assad regime.
To send the clear message to Washington, Putin appears to have a contingency that involves another world power that was absent from the U.S. led Anti-ISIS Coalition: China.
Russia has made it abundantly clear that they are taking an active role in this conflict, but the news of the Chinese military to Syria provides more insight into their contingency.
Many are excited about more force coming to Syria to destroy ISIS and ask, since Russia is beginning military operations: will Russia begin to coordinate with the U.S. to destroy ISIS?
Such cooperation or intent to destroy ISIS is food for the sheep. If Russia or the U.S. is bent on destroying ISIS, why then is Russia not joining the U.S.-led Coalition and why is Russia not seeking the assistance of the neighboring Arab countries to combat ISIS? If the idea is to destroy ISIS, why would the United States, which is also waging its own aerial campaign against ISIS, reject help? While the media argues on the strategy of both sides to combat ISIS, everyone knows that the U.S. is able to squash ISIS in few weeks. Why, then, has the U.S. had minimal success in obstructing ISIS growth in Syria and Iraq?
Obviously, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf would object to Russia’s involvement, since their main goal is to destroy Shiite expansion represented by Iran, and Bashar Al-Assad is their stronghold in the Levant.
So, as it seems, the evidence is clear: the military buildup has nothing to do with fighting ISIS. Simply put, the two major military superpowers–Russia and the U.S.–appear to be at it again; both are actively flexing their muscles through their proxies where the U.S. supports the rebels and Russia supports the Syrian Army. With Russia moving its chips, Turkey, any Sunni extremists, and/or CIA-trained “freedom fighters” intent on seizing control of the country will now need to go through Russia and Iran.
The third players, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, including the Gulf States, fear Iran’s encroachments and the loss of their sphere of influence on the Sunni Muslim world. This is what will become the crux of the whole matter.
So, to answer our original question, all of the players have a use for ISIS. To completely destroy ISIS would prevent all the excuses for one party or the other to wield its global dominance.
The sooner the sheep put this equation in their heads, the sooner they will begin to understand the Armageddon which is a world conflict centered in the Middle East.
ISIS is useful for the U.S., as well as for Russia and Turkey. Even Japan has major use for ISIS, using it as the excuse for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s re-interpretation of the Japanese constitution in regards to weapons, allowing Japan to also play a stronger role in global affairs.
Again, Armageddon is a global affair where global powers arise in a showdown that is centered in the Middle East.
The crucial issue to understand is that the strong Russian military commitment to redress the military balance on the ground would jeopardize Turkey’s calculations concerning Syria.
During Erdogan’s latest visit to Moscow, which came on the heels of Russia’s latest military buildup in Syria, Putin shunned Erdogan. Turkey’s quest to create a safe zone within Syrian territory is hampered by Russia’s involvement. To add more problems, not only for Washington, but also for Turkey, China (the biblical “armies from the east”) showed up. Beijing made a concerted effort this year to project the growing power and influence of the PLA navy. That effort has, so far, involved an unprecedented land reclamation effort in the Spratlys, a “rescue” operation in the Yemeni port of Aden, and a surprise appearance off the coast of Alaska.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke on Sept. 22 of his then-upcoming trip to Moscow, regarding “The Syria question” now that Russia (North to Turkey) and China (east of Turkey) have Erdogan’s plans in check. What Erdogan said sounded right from Daniel 11:44 “But then unpleasant news from the east and the north will alarm him” (Daniel 11:44):
Read more at http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/2015/09/russian-and-chinese-marines-advancing-in-syria-sounding-alarm-bells-of-armageddon/
FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINK
NZ NEEDS A CONSUL-GENERAL (AND A $6.2 MILLION MANSION) IN HAWAII BECAUSE ‘THE US HAS BIG DEFENSE HEADQUARTERS IN HONOLULU’ … REALLY?
Our pretend government aka corporation is borrowing $27 mill a day to keep us afloat, and has spent $6.2 mill on a house that is double the value of surrounding houses. It’s not a house it’s a mansion fit for a king. Our corporation is also flogging off our state housing, whilst many Kiwis are homeless and doesn’t give a toss about kids in poverty. Here then is a blatant example of ‘let them eat cake’. Something has gone terribly wrong with this country that once stamped out poverty and homelessness. Our CEO is a bankerfolks, he’s not a leader. He simply poses as one.
In case you missed it, the corporatization of our nation & its former government departments has led to a bottom line of maximizing profits. People no longer matter.
“Would you like to own a $6.2 million house in Hawaii? Good news – you already do. But bad news – the Government has bought the place for a diplomat.
It has inspired Story to start up a brand new segment called Silly Spending.
One of the many real estate ads for the home describes it as “ultimate modern luxury”.
“The crystal chandeliers are a great touch. The whole effect is one of a jewel box.”
It is 570 square metres of exceptional floor plan. It’s about four times bigger than your house, if you live in an average New Zealand home.
It’s got a pool and spa deck and it’s one block from the beach. The house is almost twice the average price of houses around it.
We bought the pad last year for diplomat Rob Kaiwai. He’s New Zealand’s first-ever Consul-General in Hawaii. We set up that posting last year to help out the 14 diplomatic postings we already had across the United States.
If you’re thinking he might need his house for high-powered meetings, that’s what the office in downtown Honolulu is for.”
Ministers can’t make blanket refusals to release documents under the Official Information Act without reviewing them first or by arguing the only information that could be made public would be “anodyne,” the High Court at Wellington has been told.
Several organisations concerned at the secrecy surrounding negotiation of the Trans Pacific Partnership trade and investment agreement are seeking a declaration from the court that would require Trade Minister Tim Groser to reconsider earlier decisions to withhold documents relating to the negotiations.
Related: We’re afraid of the TPPA
Matthew Palmer QC is representing the claimants, Consumer NZ, Ngati Kahungunu, Greenpeace, Oxfam, the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the NZ Nurses Organisation, and the Tertiary Education Union in an action initiated by the University of Auckland law school’s TPP critic, Professor Jane Kelsey, who claim the process of deciding to withhold information requested so far has been unlawful.
Justice David Collins, who is hearing the application, reacted rarely during Dr Palmer’s submissions but asked him before the lunch break to reflect on a recent decision “about the extent to which courts should give direction.”
Dr Palmer argued the New Zealand government should not be “contracting out” its legal obligations under the OIA by making it subservient to the requirements of a strict confidentiality agreement between the 12 TPP nations.
Justice Collins observed that such a decision “could be consistent” with the act.
Dr Palmer responded:
“Our submission is that if there was no other reason for information to be withheld, that agreement cannot provide an additional reason.”
Much of the morning’s arguments revolved around the fact that neither the minister nor the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had undertaken a full review of the documents in question to determine whether parts that were either in the public domain already or were “anodyne” and uncontroversial and could be released.
“The minister failed to undertake a basic element by failing to assess the information itself,” said Palmer.
” That’s the basis of a request for a determination. Blanket refusals are not contemplated by the act.”
Dr Palmer also dwelled on the approach being taken by the European Union, which has been willing to allow release of negotiating texts relating to the European-US equivalent of TPP, known as TTIP, and comments by the European Ombudsman suggesting the traditional secrecy surrounding trade negotiations is counter-productive to public trust in such processes. The hearing is continuing.