Kopiere das mal von MOA, unübersetzt...

The Thirty Years’ War as a Laboratory 

From 1618 to 1648, Europe ran an experiment on itself: what happens when you wage total war, fueled by religious fervor, viewing your enemy not as a rival, but as the embodiment of evil?

The result: between one-third and one-half of Central Europe’s population perished. Elites suffered alongside everyone else.

A war started for the “true faith” became a self-devouring machine no one could stop.

The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 marked a realization: elites couldn’t afford wars where they themselves became victims.

Not because they became more humane, but because thirty years had empirically proven that unchecked violence consumes those who unleash it. 

The “Gentleman’s War” – Not Ethics, but Engineering 

From the Thirty Years’ War emerged the engineering of controlled conflict: You don’t kill leaders because you’ll need them to sign the peace treaty. Kill the king, and there’s no one left to surrender, making the war endless. Families are left untouched: the loser must retain enough to accept defeat, otherwise they’ll fight to the death. Negotiations create a zone of immunity; one strike during talks, and no one will trust a mediator for the next hundred years. Third-party nations are left untouched, as hitting them multiplies your enemies. In essence, elites wanted to play chess—to manage conflict from a position above the board. Self-imposed limits on violence were that external position. You can start, wage, and end a war as long as you don’t become one of the pieces being taken. 

World War II as Confirmation 

The Napoleonic Wars shook the system; the Congress of Vienna reinstalled it. WWI, with its accompanying civil wars and revolutions, cracked it further. WWII confirmed the lesson of 1648 on a scale that left no room for illusion. The UN, Geneva Conventions, nuclear deterrence, “red lines”—all engineering solutions to one problem: preventing the players from becoming pieces. The Cold War—forty years of managed conflict—was a direct product of this realization: you can be adversaries, but you can’t cross the threshold where elites themselves become victims. It worked not because everyone agreed, but because violating the rules cost more than following them. 

[...]

Die USA, ja, Dieter, ich weiß Du willst, dass man VS schreibt...

Professor Jiang Predicts: US WILL LOSE Iran War
Krystal and Saagar are joined by Professor Jiang to discuss the US war on Iran.

Wiki (übersetzt):
Jiang Xueqin (chinesisch: 江学勤; Pinyin: Jiāng Xuéqín; * 1976[2]) ist ein chinesisch-kanadischer Pädagoge, Schriftsteller, Historiker und Geopolitiktheoretiker, der in Peking lebt und arbeitet. Er ist bekannt für seine Beiträge zur Bildungsreform in China – insbesondere für die Förderung von Kreativität, kritischem Denken und globaler Bürgerschaft – sowie für seinen YouTube-Kanal „Predictive History“, auf dem er strukturhistorische Analysen, Spieltheorie und Konzepte aus Isaac Asimovs fiktiver Psychohistorie anwendet, um wichtige geopolitische Entwicklungen zu interpretieren und vorherzusagen.

Das werden wir alle merken.

Noch sind wir in der Warmlaufphase 1 von 3: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/crude-oil

Die weiteren Ereignisse kommen dann per Zugzwang: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/eu-natural-gas

Vielleicht gibt es dann eine Seite www.wozu-noch-tanken.de?