RFK stupidity now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfIW9...
@charliedontsurf334
Funny how Peter didn't call out the lies during COVID! The COVID jab needed a change to the definition to count as a vaccine. Stop defending the people who drew first blood.
@jonlittle5032
It needed a 'change' because it is new technology. Washington died because of standards of care that is now illegal.
@charliedontsurf334
If it doesn't stop transmission as every other vaccine does, it isn't a vaccine.
@jonlittle5032
it does, so it is
The strongest mortality indicators of COVID are: did you go to school, work, church or a concert during the pandemic. Oh, and believing T is the 2nd Coming?
@charliedontsurf334
No the strongest mortality indicators were being morbidly obese, older than 75, or a chain smoker. Kids didn't need it. Military men didn't need it. Do some research.
@jonlittle5032
Don't need to. Lived it. Keep trying.
Your research is faulty because your not factoring who got the jab and who didn't. Most military got it. Most kids got it. So you can't say they didn't need it. They survived. Because they got the jab. Understand research methodology before prescribing bleach or UV, sport.
Actually the biggest mortality factor was not getting the jab. Those who did not get vaccinated were 97 times greater of death than those who were vaccinated. But that's not science, right? That's just statistics, right?
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
Another TDS troll trying to shut down FREE SPEECH
1sthander373
For everyone who just blindly believes everything Peter says and thinks he completely understands the different situations especially on the other side of the world. Remember Peter said Trump could NOT win against Kamala (ED. NOTE -- Put a Pin in that sentence).
@darrenmclaughlin1362
When? He did predict in January or February of the election year (before Biden dropped out) that Biden would win. I did not find anything with regard to Harris.
@1sthander373
@darrenmclaughlin1362 it was a 5-6 min video about a month or little more out from the election. Peter never said Harris would win but he answered someone's Question about the election by basically explaining all the things against Trump (reasons he would lose) in a way that basically said he couldn't overcome..etc.without making a absolute (i think this person will win) prediction. Im trying to remember his location (background) at the time to make it easier to find but I can't remember. I do remember that "Episode" though and that i disagreed with him. + I've seen a cut version in a compilation of "Predictions" that was posted shortly after the election.
@jonlittle5032
@1sthander373 So, 'basically', you're backing off from your original assertion.
@1sthander373
@jonlittle5032 Not at all. I never said Peter said "Kamala will win" because he obviously tries to stay/appear impartial but I do remember him explaining shortly (month or 2) before the election that Trump would lose for multiple reasons. Implying Kamala/Dems would win without actually saying it.
Again im not Anti Peter im just saying he's not always correct with his "Predictions" of future events and shouldn't just be blindly believed.
@jonlittle5032
Nice dodge, but saying the Chiefs didn't win the 2025 Super Bowl is the same as saying the Eagles did.
@1sthander373
@jonlittle5032 How's it a Dodge ? You seem to be arguing something I never said or are just a Peter Sycophant upset anyone dares criticize him + Your football example is in the past tense and is also redundant or do you not understand what "Implying Kamala/Dems would win without actually say it" means.
What are you trying to argue?
I never said Peter said she would win.
He implied it without Actually saying it.
@jonlittle5032
@1sthander373 Lol. Hamlet, Act III, Scene II - Queen Gertrude; or Macbeth, Act V, Scene V, Lines 17-28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHrjq...
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
2 of 2 ...
@johnreynolds7996
"Siberia 2 will transport 30B cubic meters of natural gas per year"
Yeah, so....? That is 30B cubic meters of NG that was originally intended to flow west the Europe that is not going to flow east to China.
"China's current consumption is 400B per year -- 13 times larger. "
Well, color me impressed. Your point being? Because what I'm seeing is that China's NG demands are huge, and Russia is shifting its supply infrastructe eastward to supply it, rather than westward to Europe.
"Also, China imports 11 millions of barrels of oil per year. S2 will transport ... 0."
Thank you for that pointless point. I never realized that gas pipelines don't carry oil.
"Please stop trying."
I will when you agree to stop erecting straw man arguments.
"Also, in an article in the Moscow Times a couple days ago, the phrase used was "IF completed","
You do know that the "Moscow Times" is a Dutch publication?
You do know that, right?
"Mongolia has still not signed off on it"
They signed off on it on September 2 (ED NOTE: The article I cited was dated Sept 4, but JR was giving me enough fertilizer ... so), at the same signing ceremony as Russia and China.
You didn't know that? How odd. I suppose that's what happens when you get your "news" from a Dutch intelligence cut-out.
"and no construction contracts have been negotiated."
Because the financing arrangements haven't been finalized. Which seems very sensible to my mind.
What, you want the construction contracts to be signed before the Russians and Chinese have agreed on how those companies are going to be paid?
That is standard practice in your neck of the woods, is it?
And you accuse me of being a try-hard...
Laughable.
"Siberia 2 will transport 30B cubic meters of natural gas per year"
According to Gazprom the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline will supply 50bcm of natural gas per year.
The same agreement will see the original Power of Siberia pipeline increase its supply to 44bcm per year, and the Eastern Route pipeline to 12bcm per year.
Tapping away on my calculator (ED. NOTE - put a pin in THAT reference) ... tap... tap... yep, that comes to 106bcm of Russian natural gas that will be going east to China, even though you claimed that Russia's gas infrastructure is destined to remain pointing towards European markets rather than to China.
How odd, it's almost as if you don't know what you are talking about.
"China's current consumption is 400B per year -- 13 times larger."
Going back to my calculator... tap... tap... yep, as I thought: 106bcm of Russian natural gas will be slightly more than a quarter of China's current consumption, not 1/13th.
Again, you appear not to know what you are talking about.
Why am I not surprised?
More objective sources say 30, but 50 vs 400? When China's logistics get cut, they can run a V8 on one cylinder. Yay!
Again. This thing has been out there for nearly two decades. At 400B a year, and even an optimistic 2030 completion, where is that 1,800B come from? The point is not current data projected forward, but China's current supply lines being threatened. Yeah. Use the calc.
🤦♂
@yzy8638
laughable as usual, you dont add in china's own production and pretend everything will be as usual during war time? yeah, the moment you start to "cut off" some1's supply line, you are objectively starting a war without declaration, and you expect no retaliation, LOL.
and sure, every countries along the route somehow feel so safe their trading route got cut, good mr crusader king, declaring war on dozen countries at the same time, you sure is brightest star of a day.
@jonlittle5032
-- @yzy8638 The issue is not China's productive capacity (5m) -- it is how will China replace its imports if their supply chain is cut. Short answer - it can't.
@jonlittle5032
-- @johnreynolds7996 I believe by the rules of WWE Tag Team, it is your turn. yzy is pinned and needs help.
@johnreynolds7996
You then: "China's current consumption is 400B per year "
You now: "where is that 1,800B come from?"
You might want to change the batteries on that calculator of yours.
"it is how will China replace its imports if their supply chain is cut. Short answer - it can't."
Short answer - it can. The supply chains from Russia can come via rail, or via pipeline, or via ships to Vladivostok.
If the USA attacks those rail networks, or bombs those pipelines, or sinks those ships then the USA would be at war with both China AND Russia. Which - once more, yet again - is a war that the USA can not win.
Short answer - it can. The supply chains from the Middle East can come via ports in the Indian Ocean and from there overland through Myanmar to China.
If the USA attacks that shipping then the USA would be at war with both China AND India and - again - that is a war the USA can not win.
You appear to believe that a jungle would stop that, which is beyond bizarre: the USA cut a road through the mountains to supply China in 1942-1945 and that road was completed in a year using 1940s technology.
"More objective sources say 30"
Your "more objective sources" appear to be the Moscow Times, which is a disinformation operation of the Dutch AIVD.
Which you appeared to be completely unaware of until I pointed it out to you. Yay!
"but 50 vs 400?"
OK, once more because you appear to be a very slow fellow: it is 106bcm vs 400bcm.
"When China's logistics get cut, "
sigh One more time: China's logistics won't get cut. The USA has no way of severing any supply chain from Russia to China that won't cause Russia to enter that war on the side of the Chinese.
The supposed trump card of a naval blockade via the Strait of Malacca is a bust now that India has patched up its differences with China.
Again, once more: goods to China go through the Strait of Malacca because that's the CHEAPEST way to do it, not because it is the ONLY way to do it.
Something the Pentagon hasn't internalized. You neither, by the look of things.
@jonlittle5032
As opposed to Gazprom? Expat Muscovites have a far more legitimate and objective Russian point of view than Putin and the FSB. Please. Stop. You are embarrassing the internet.
Goat trails from Russia (or Myanmar) into China do not have the load carrying capacity China requires. 🤦♂🤦♂🤦♂
Calculator function: 400b/year for 4 1/2 years, 2025-2030 = 1,800B. Your forecast, not mine.
As I instructed you in a separate comment thread, wartime logistics is not the same as commercial logistics.
The signing of Sept 2 was not a contract -- it was a Memorandum of Understanding. In other words, "wouldn't it be great, guys, if we did this thing?" The Mongolian government has grave concerns and the article I cited from the much respected Moscow Times dated Sept 4 reflected that. Spending too much time 'sighing' when faced with incomprehension and not enough time thinking about it?
REF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHrjq...
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
1 of 2 ...
This would be amusing but as I point out, it just embarrasses the internet. The first comment string was abandoned and the troll started up another one -- would it be hubris if I claimed he was running from a good fight?
REF:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHrjq...
Apologies for the length. What JR lacks in clarity and quality, he makes up for in quantity.
THE WORLD ISLAND
@johnreynolds7996
Why do the Chinese need to "break out" of that first island chain?
For shipping?
Why?
They can bring all their commercial ships back home and watch the USA's economy crash.
And as for imports, ahem, two words for you: Russia, India.
Raw material and food doesn't have to be shipped into China from those two countries because there are land routes.
The World Island. It's a thing.
@jonlittle5032
Two words, sport - Himalayan Mountains. Most of the trade between India and China flows (sails) through the Straits of Malacca.
@johnreynolds7996
That trade can be offloaded in India, then transported through Bangladesh and Myanmar. No need to cross the Himalayas at all.
@jonlittle5032
Lol. Ever been there? No logistic infrastructure through the jungle, sport. It ain't the Great Plains of America or the Northern Plains of Europe. Keep trying -- This isn't a game of Civ 7 where you can just build things anywhere.
@johnreynolds7996
You are kidding, right? In WW2 the USA found that they were cut off from the normal supply routes to China because the Japanese had occupied Burma.
No problem, they just carved roads through the mountains and through the jungles. Took them less than a year.
The Chinese could do exactly the same in reverse: the Strait of Malacca is blockaded? No problem. Sweep the PLA into Myanmar and they'll have some ports that completely and utterly bypass the Strait of Malacca.
I.... honestly, your tunnel-vision is quite Zeihan-like. You think only in terms of what the USA can do by way of Very Cunning Plans, and give no consideration that this would be a game where both sides get to play their cards.
The USA blocks the Strait of Malacca? OK, good move, dude. The Chinese will sweep into Myanmar. Heck, Bangladesh too and that would give them a land bridge all the way to India.
Too easy, and anyone who can't see that is about as useful as a Peter Zeihan.
@jonlittle5032
omg. Logistics during war is not the same as commercial logistics. And. There is no border between Bangladesh and China. Please stop trying.
@jonlittle5032
Personal attacks and aggression are not a sign of strength, but fear. And that's all we smell from these posts.
@jonlittle5032
🙄🤦♂
NATURAL GAS ACROSS RUSSIAN GOAT TRAILS
And then there was this, where JR brought his 'little buddy' for moral (?) support (zyz and JR have a history of WWE Tag Teaming ...)
@johnreynolds7996
In (a previous video) Peter Zeihan "explains" why the Russian natural gas industry is going to collapse because the Europeans aren't buying and, heck, there is nothing the Russians do about that.
Which I found very amusing indeed, because the algo threw that at me on the very day that Russia and China signed the agreement on the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline.
So, yeah, what can Russia do about that? Answer: they can ship it all to China instead, because China is a willing and reliable customer.
And the Europeans? Well, their economy is going to collapse because their energy costs make them uncompetitive.
China, on the other hand.....
Zeihan is a joke. He is opinionated, which would be worthwhile if his opinions were worth a tinker's cuss.
But, alas, no.........
@jonlittle5032
Russia's infrastructure is geared to shipping nearly all its oil and natural gas west, to Europe. It would take years to build out any connections to China, years Russia and China do not have. That is why Russia uses its shadow fleet to transport their oil to India and China -- from St. Peterburg and the Black Sea.
@johnreynolds7996
Power of Siberia 2 starts construction late this year. Gas will be flowing through it by 2030.
I have no doubt that if this was a matter of life or death for China then they could halve that time.
@jonlittle5032
Siberia 2 will transport 30B cubic meters of natural gas per year; China's current consumption is 400B per year -- 13 times larger. Also, China imports 11 millions of barrels of oil per year. S2 will transport ... 0. Please stop trying.
Also, in an article in the Moscow Times a couple days ago, the phrase used was "IF completed", not when. Mongolia has still not signed off on it and no construction contracts have been negotiated.
@yzy8638
and your point? you yourself claim theres some shadow fleet, so the gas is flowing, unless you advocate attack on civilian ship, some more US is still buying from russia, what a reliable ally.
@jonlittle5032
-- @yzy8638 Some days I really miss the old boys from St. Pete. This new crop just embarrasses the internet.
0 - 0
Anti-DEI banality:
@psychohist
Zeihan’s lack of military experience and knowledge are showing.
DEI is not just about recruitment. It is also about how the female helicopter pilot who couldn’t control altitude and crashed into a commercial airliner made Captain
@jonlittle5032
What about all the accidents by male pilots? This accident was a result of a bad altimeter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCI0p...
.
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
Troll Smack:
@HazemeII
wait, I thought last month their wasn't enough staff to negotiate a deal, now it's not enough to enforce it? do you hear yourself? "let me find ways to make it bad"
@jonlittle5032
It's not a deal, it is a Memorandum of Understanding. That's just a handshake -- it still needs to be negotiated. And there is still not enough staff to do that, nor enforce one if it does get negotiated.
and ...
@HazemeII
tell us more about all that inflation that's coming in july...
@jonlittle5032
Core inflation is up. Inflation, as an economic indicator, is generally a lagging indicator so if it starts to point negative, the damage is already done. Zeihan's analysis was predicated on Trump's tariffs going into effect the beginning of April. That hasn't happened yet (because he is eating south of the border) so the 'prediction' gets moved back. The analysis is still valid.
and ...
@kenking3188
Peter, you don't like Trump. Your commentaries have suffered because of this bias.
@jonlittle5032
Zeihan does not like some Trump's policies, but not all ... the only bias is towards reality. What is your bias?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fQRj...
.
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
And ... when all else fails:
@AllieRogers-mq1kf
8 hours ago
This show is unwatchable now
@jonlittle5032
7 hours ago
So, you're finally leaving? Yay!
@AllieRogers-mq1kf
7 hours ago
@jonlittle5032 I like Peter. But I don’t think he is being very rational when it comes to this admin. Yes there are things to criticize but he makes it sound much worse than it is I think.
@jonlittle5032
6 minutes ago
Do I need to keep holding the door open, or have you left the building yet?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NySVg...
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
For some reason, the "butcher's" thumb decided to rub out my last response. I posted a different response to Joseph. I think the first is more inciteful, but Hans the Butcher thinks it was merely ... inciting. It seems to have taken, for now:
@jonlittle5032
1 minute ago
Joseph. The analysis is still valid. Somebody at 1600 Penn just kicked the can down the road a bit. Investments analysis have given that strategy a name ...
0 - 0
One of the prevailing themes of the Trolling on the Zeihan on Geopolitics channel is that Zeihan has "wrongly" called out the collapse of the Chinese economy on the backslide of their collapsing demographics. It isn't that they know what they are talking about, they just don't like some of the negative, even derogatory, commentary on Trump. So, they are taking a page from the liberals and are trying to cancel him. Disinfo can only be countered if one stands up and pushes back. Here is a snippet of me pushing back:
@Balin93
6 days ago
TLDR: We have 8 years left of the 10 years that Peter predicted 12 years ago.
@jonlittle5032
6 days ago
Nope. Still crashing sport. Zeihan is not Jeanne Dixon nor Jimmy the Greek. It isn't prognostication with a date and time stamp on the Tarot card. It is analysis, and the fundamentals of that analysis are still valid.
6 days ago
@jonlittle5032 what to google the first time this genius prediction started? This monkey is not the first
@jonlittle5032
5 days ago
@Jho399 Again, not prognostication. Analysis. Stop reading cards.
@jonlittle5032
5 days ago
Analysis provides timeframes, not date/time stamps. Zeihan did not say it would happen in a year, or a century; he said in a decade. The error is not with the analysis, it is in the deliberate misinterpretation of that estimate. Orders of magnitude ... precision of significant digits, 5th grade math.
@jbsop79
4 days ago
Predicting the future is always a gamble. Peter as with all forecasters must be taken with a healthy dose of scepticism and critical thinking. My thinking is that he gives great background knowledge and helps aggregate data on complex situations. This provides a place to stand on intellectually and then evaluate the environment and make your own judgements. Sometimes I confirm what he proposes and sometimes I realize that he was off and agree with an opposing view. We are not MAGA cultists here, Peter is a resource not a channel from on high.
@jonlittle5032
3 days ago
@jbsop79 No. Analysis does not predict, it provides analysis and estimates and conclusions based on that analysis. Estimates of something happening in a decade is not a prediction, and it does not mean 10.00 years; it means more than a couple years, less than a century. If you want predictions, find a medium and channel Dixon or Jimmy.
@josephsamberg2899
2 hours ago
I’m was just thinking this but didn’t want to type it because I wasn’t sure exact specifics. I watched Peter in February and March when he was speaking about how bad the economy was going to get and the shortage we were going to have by the summer from the tariff war. Almost end of summer and not seeing anything at all from that prediction either lol
@jonlittle5032
0 seconds ago
@josephsamberg2899 That analysis, and Wall Street's initial response, was based on the assumption we wouldn't be ordering Tex-Mex the next day. The analysis is still valid, as any competent economist, and most of Wall Street, will attest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8a9Z...
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
I love it when trolls get cute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udlkd...
@JJJohnsonlive
4 minutes ago
Little John ...Awww....calm down child.
watch video on watch page
0 - 0
Capitalism is the worst economic system ever devised - except for all the others tried thus far. But ... it is most definitely tied for the worst political system ever devised. Full stop.