[Micki]

Iz was put there and GIVEN nooks sfor one reason. They will use them when they are told to use them. They dont have a choice about it at all. They are a red herring and a pawn.

Sounds like you believe the "Albert Pike predictions" and that both US and Israel ulitimately are controlled by the International Bankers (Illuminati).

[cowuvula]

The bankers are a red herring too. They do what they are told.

Everyone is in this and it is not going to survive peak oil though.

[Micki]

Now I don't get you.
SOMEONE obviously is doing the 'telling'.
So if it is not the illuminati bankers that are telling Israel, then who is it? Surely you don't suggest they are told by the majority of masses.

[threadbear]

Scott Ritter on possibility of Iran attack and strategy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH1ufEkl ... re=related

[Plantagenet]

Israel only wants to keep Iran non-nuclear. It certainly doesnt have to project force or destroy thousands of targets to do that. Lets not forget Israel has one of the finest air forces in the world. It only takes a few strikes from Israel to accomplish their goals.
Why on Earth would Israel want a full on war with Iran?

Specop_007, you think they can bomb targets and then call it quits?????
The ball will be in Iran's court and it is up to them if they want to retaliate and I am sure they won't let Israel bomb their country and then kiss and make up.

It would definitely mean war. Iran would order attacks on northern Israel by their proxy Hizbullah militia, and might become directly involved as well. As horrible as that would be, it might be better for Israel then waiting until Ahmadinejad gets his hands on nukes and has a nutty religious vision of a glowing 13th hidden Imam ordering him to attempt to fulfill his threats to wipe Israel off the map.

[Micki]

It would definitely mean war. Iran would order attacks on northern Israel by their proxy Hizbullah militia, and might become directly involved as well. As horrible as that would be, it might be better for Israel then waiting until Ahmadinejad gets his hands on nukes and has a nutty religious vision of a glowing 13th hidden Imam ordering him to attempt to fulfill his threats to wipe Israel off the map.

First of all, I thought it was already clear that there is no evidence Iran is attempting to get nukes. While it is clear that Israels voice/proxy USA has lied about similar things in the past to justify invasion.
Secondly, what makes the belief in a 13th Imam so nutty?
It is not so different from "second coming of Christ" etc. And can expand a little bit more on where you get the idea that Ahmadinejad is being "ordered" by this Imam????
The closest to this type of thinking I have found is that he believes that the Imam already may be among them and is impacting on events. That is however pretty far from listening to a divine voice in the head etc.

I find this much more disturbing:

George Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq'
.
.
.
"President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

Guardian

[shakespear1]

Code: Select all

13th Imam"

How about the "Promised Land" or God Chosen People line served by some religions. The Fuhrer had his mantra to the Germans about their place under the Sun.

Same ol mush

[Ferretlover]

The Iran Plans
Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb? by Seymour M. Hersh

The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Current and former American military and intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups. The officials say that President Bush is determined to deny the Iranian regime the opportunity to begin a pilot program, planned for this spring, to enrich uranium. …

The New Yorker

IMO, Bush&Co are going to do whatever it takes to make it (an air attack) happen; and, I don't think they are going to bother to attempt to get the American public on their side.

[threadbear]

The Iran Plans
Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb? by Seymour M. Hersh

The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Current and former American military and intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat "troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups. The officials say that President Bush is determined to deny the Iranian regime the opportunity to begin a pilot program, planned for this spring, to enrich uranium. …

The New Yorker

IMO, Bush&Co are going to do whatever it takes to make it (an air attack) happen; and, I don't think they are going to bother to attempt to get the American public on their side.

They are in the process of removing top level oppostion, like General Fallon, and the other recently fired top air force generals, so they can do just that. It's beyond sabre rattling, with this last wave of dismissals. Fallon was replaced by Petraus, a hawk, and bootlicker, and the airforce have a new general, who emphasizes he is a Jewish/American. At what point do the mass of Americans realize that their executive branch has been taken over by fascist Israelis, and the parasitic military infection, by the same type, is almost complete. I guess you can't even begin to discuss this in the mainstream without being labeled "anti-Semitic".

Here is more on the new air force chief:

"Schwartz’s Jewish identity did not go unnoticed after his appointment, particularly given the current military tensions with Iran. Press TV, an Iranian English language media outlet, wrote an article last week, titled “U.S. Names Jewish as Air Force Chief.”

There have long been rumors that Schwartz’s predecessor, Michael Moseley, was opposed to a military attack on Iran. The appointment of Schwartz has prompted speculation in the Iranian press and on some blogs that the Bush administration is yet again seriously considering the military option to thwart Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Aside from the recent controversies, one of the most prominent challenges facing the Air Force has been a series of lawsuits and constitutional challenges at the academy. Following revelations compiled in a May 2005 report from Americans United for Separation of Church and State that evangelical officers and staff members had pressured cadets of other faiths to convert — charging that there was “systematic and pervasive religious bias and intolerance at the highest levels of the Academy command structure” — the Air Force appointed an investigative panel. In June 2005, the panel found evidence that officers and faculty members of the academy periodically used their positions to promote their Christian beliefs and failed to accommodate the religious needs of non-Christian cadets. no “overt religious discrimination” was found.

The Pentagon has since issued formal guidelines to protect against religious intolerance and discrimination in the Air Force Academy, but Congress partly rescinded them under pressure from evangelical groups"


http://www.forward.com/articles/13574/

[Ibon]

"...... in fact we couldn't do any of these "sustainable" things without the status quo remaining resilient."

Hogwash. This is Appalachia and people lived pretty well here before TVA and developers came in and changed things. There's a deep memory of those times, and those skills are still practised here. A quote from the documentary "Mountain Talk":

"Life was hard, but we were happy. We didn't even know we was poor 'til the Government came in and told us we were."

Everything is relative.

I agreed with your post except for this part. I have the good fortune here in Panama to witness the rural mountain culture and have had workers who still perform labor and have skills that we haven't seen active in North America for over 3 generations. Just like in North America though this mountain culture is dying. The same trend is happening here that happened in North America. The guy who can drop an old growth tree with a chain saw and move huge pieces of the trunk around using leverage and long poles and cut 4000 board feed into straight perfect blocks. The worker who machete's all the weeds from our pastures, the guy who uses a sledge hammer to do road work. The calories burned here with these rural workers sometimes makes my jaw drop in a combination of admiration and amazement. You don't see workers in North Americans doing this anymore. Our employees a while back during a lunch break opened up about how none of their children will follow their way of life, that no one wants to do this work anymore, their children are all drawn to urban jobs etc. The small producer of coffee or vegetable growers are disappearing here just as the small family farms disappeared a couple generations ago in North America.

As you mentioned its all relative. There is a combination of skill set and attitude that has mostly vanished in America and is slowly vanishing here as well.

Your point that in Appalachia in the past it worked is certainly valid in where we will draw back down to in several generations. But I am focusing on now, on where the current crop of citizens knowledge and work attitude stands in North America and comparing that to here in Panama and seeing the same trend lines everywhere. I am not saying that you or Careinke or myself shouldn't be attempting sustainable practices. I am only pointing out that right now in the current paradigm what props these noble efforts up is the status quo that we try to make ourselves independent from. Nothing more. It is what it is.

I think after a couple generations of punctuated chaos we will fall down to an energy regime and population where we will live with far more human labor once again, with sustainable practices, etc. so of course, all of our noble efforts do represent a thread of knowledge that can accelerate and is therefore worthy.

How many of those folks in Appalachia can do human labor today that burns 4000-5000 calories in an 8 hour shift like their forefathers did. How many of those folks have really retained a viable set of skills to return to past cottage industries and trades? Is the economic system favorable for them to survive even if they would attempt to turn back the clock ? I don't want to stereotype the poverty of Appalachia but the statistics are pretty grim around obesity, diabetes, drug addiction, depression there.

I derive a deep deep satisfaction from being off the grid and what we do here. It provides me with a deep sense of contentment regarding this self sufficiency. I assume you share this sentiment. That is enough of a reason to pursue. Everything I am pointing out is really more to keep this all in perspective in terms of how dependent we all our on the status quo that permits us these indulgences. I know you probably do not like that I equate living off the grid as an indulgence but believe me it is nothing more and it is truly sustained by the still resilient status quo. At this point in time.

[dohboi]

Ibon, I hope you are not claiming that elites use less per capita than the middle class does.

Really, we can't continue the discussion further without clearer definitions. You introduced the terms, so maybe you can offer what you perceive as being the definitions for 'global elite' versus 'global middle class.'

[Ibon]

The end of the middle-class isn't necessarily something to be seen as "better" if you're IN the middle-class, which is most here (including you, financially speaking, despite being an expat).

Absolutely. That is why it is so important to understand the dynamics unfolding.

Uh, oh. Here we go! I can see Dan Quinn walking down the hallway now.

HG cultures represent the last egalitarian arrangement humans experienced.

And that's useful to us now...how exactly?

I am only suggesting that an empowered middle class is an anomaly during the past 10,000 years of civilization. I am not suggesting anything else except for all of us to recognize that external limits can easily take us back to the historical norm of a tiny elite and vast population of peasants. A flat lining economy and declining resource base coupled with climate change could provide both the ecological and economic conditions for the elite to start sucking on the marrow of the middle class to maintain their privilege taking us back to these historical norms.

How many of you think democracy will survive the consequences of human overshoot?

These sentiments have no practical basis in the short-term.

No relevancy in the short term? Hmmm... let's see. Rise of corporate power, citizens united, corporate lobbyists, Donald Trump, offshoring of jobs, China, the fasted growing economy has a planned central government, increasing disparity of wealth, nationalism and populism on the rise, national security and survellience of citizens. Where have the trend lines been going and what are the forces that will continue to reinforce these trend lines? You think this is irrelevant in the short term. Think again.

The middle class is the most vulnerable segment of our global population, where most of the fat will be trimmed. The elite will stay the same, the poorer can't get much poorer without starvation and disease. This leaves the middle class as the most vulnerable segment of our society

Ibon, I hope you are not claiming that elites use less per capita than the middle class does.

Really, we can't continue the discussion further without clearer definitions. You introduced the terms, so maybe you can offer what you perceive as being the definitions for 'global elite' versus 'global middle class.'

Of course not per capita. Let's take a hypothetical 5 billion dollars and look at the total resource consumption in the following scenarios

1) 1 million people with $ 5,000 each = $ 5 billion peasant agrarian population (environmental degradation due to slash and burn
over grazing, habitat destruction, strain on resource base
1) 100,000 people with $ 50,000 each = $ 5 billion lower middle class significant resource consumption
2) 10,000 people with $ 500,000 each = $ 5 billion Max. consumption, healthy middle class. Consumer goods, cars, homes, etc
3) 1,000 people with $ 5 million each = $ 5 billion Excessive consumption restricted to only one thousand people


When this wealth is not distributed equitably this has an interesting impact on resource consumption. 1 billionaire consumes far less than 1 thousand millionaires in aggregate. Apply this to our global population and it is not hard to see that when resources go into decline and economic growth stagnates, the high consuming middle class turns from an asset to a liability for the elite. The growth pump stops flowing upward. In a growing economy the wealth pump allows a healthy middle class to consume which then enables the elite to become exponentially more wealthy. Everybody consumes like a bandit. When the economic system flat lines and goes into decline the high consuming middle class becomes a liability as there is no wealth moving upward in a stagnant economy.

The most adaptive parasites do not debilitate their hosts. The elites have managed well thus far but there is no doubt looking at the trend lines of the last couple of decades that the elite are now sucking on the marrow of the middle class and will continue to do so. Ecologically it makes sense. Economically it also makes sense.

All of us here are members of the middle class most likely so don't shoot the messenger. I jumped the tracks and left the world of commerce a couple of decades ago. I am privileged but not all that wealthy. My best asset is not money but rather the courage to have turned off the valve, sold off the business and threw security to the wind in order to have this clear perspective from a mountain top looking from the outside in.

Ennui says this is dangerously close to Montequest. That makes me laugh. Reality is getting dangerously closer to many things Montequest discussed. Reality is clinically detached by nature!

[Newfie]

Doh, of course the top 10% consume more, almost by definition.

If you got your wish and someone killed all the top 10% on Monday, on Thursday you would have a new too 10% who would be the biggest consumers, etc. and so forth.

The top 10% is where the 90% feel they belong and where long to be.

We are a competitive species, and we show our success through conspicuous consumption. Think peacocks. The tails are of no practical use, except to show off how healthy they are and what good gene donors they are.

[sparky]

.
Pretty typical of the law of stuff up following wishful thinking
since no one can exactly articulate what is the US policy in Syria
some pretty ugly vultures are coming home to roost

http://atimes.com/2016/08/hello-want-to ... -to-syria/

The US state department has been repeating its matra that " Assad mush go "
to give power to the "Syrian democratic forces"
while edging the language somewhat with an increasing vague timeline .
the recent attempted coup in turkey got the local big man Ergolan get very suspicious
there was just too many US friends in the attempt ,
that's paranoia of course but politicians are paranoia ,
it's a job description and they are not always wrong .
now prez Ergolan is swinging all the way , kissing Prez Putin the Russian way
full on the mouth .
Iran which love America not has let the Russian air force use one of its base
this will come down a treat ( and a threat ) to those gulf petro-sheiks rag-heads which though they were safe.
Iran / Syria /Russia are the best of friends ,
now turkey is changing its views about the whole Syrian mess
and , out of the blue , China , smarting from some maritime dispute ,came to hug the Syrian president Assad
it must be a rather interesting time in the department of state ,
their whole middle East policy , if one could call it that , is not only turning to Sh..t under their very eyes but it act as a magnet to anyone with an axe to grind

a possible use of the Nato air base of Incirlik by the Russians would bee a rich joke ,
that's were the B61 plutonium bombs are stored ( they just cost 11 Billions to upgrade )

[Ibon]

Yesterday I had a very nice visit here. Two Americans who live here, one who I have known for several years, are offering small one acre plots of land for those looking for a bug out shelter when the whole house of cards collapses. They have a nice piece of property and a nice project that combines owning a piece of land in a loose association of owners all with the same vision. Not exactly a community but sharing some assets like water and utilities and neighbors who have their back when needed. They came up here to pick my brain, see our pelton wheel that produces our power, and ask my advice on how to market their property to attract buyers who are looking for a bit of security and sustainability in a world likely to soon go rogue! I am used to this forum to discuss these topics. It was very interesting to have face to face dialogue with other folks who wrestle with these topics we discuss. Both these individuals are McGuiver types, one has lived here for almost 15 years and has gone somewhat native.

With my recent posts fresh on my mind, I ended up challenging both of these guys to really confront how they would survive if the resilient status quo really did collapse.

The conclusion from this meeting and from the recent posts on this thread is that many of us feel a loss of control in our lives exactly because we do recognize how dependent we are on BAU at the same time as we recognize how wobbly our economic system and biosphere is. This desire for control is what leads more and more folks to attempting to go live off the grid or garden in their back yards.

This desire for control is actually really worthy in that it enhances well being. Increasing resourcefulness in growing your own food, sharing this with other like minded individuals, securing your own water and power if you have the conditions that permit this is all very fulfilling. Urban garden plots, riding bicycles instead of cars. The whole gambit. It's all good.

I salute all who do this and attempt it.

And if you do believe that these actions will sustain you through a collapse of BAU, then who am I to poke a hole in your illusion. I don't go around challenging religious people that the invisible man in the sky they believe in is watching over them. WHy should I attempt to do this to those choosing the anchor of sustainability or living off the grid to provide them with a security blanket to survive the upcoming punctuated instabilities coming our way?

So I am backing off and changing tact. Go for it. It is a wonderful decision and very creative.

If anyone is interested in these guys project here is a link to their site. I did offer to help them.

http://www.fincacazador.com/

[KaiserJeep]

Interesting discussion, which also is relevant if the proximate doom one believes in is the depletion of cheap fossil fuels rather than climate change.

Focussing in on the USA again, what one sees with the baby boomers retiring is an overall decline in employment (i.e. lower workforce participation rates), an increase in Social Security pensioners, an increase in consumption of Medicare health services, and a dispersal of the population from overpopulated urban environments to outlying suburbs and rural areas. The changing technology of private vehicles, the increases in use of public transportation, and (most of all) the reduced lifestyles of retired folks are all having the effect of prolonging BAU.

Average U.S. gasoline usage lowest in 3 decades, study says

With improvements in vehicle fuel economy, U.S. drivers’ average gasoline consumption is the lowest it’s been in at least 30 years, according to research by the University of Michigan released today.

The number of gallons of gasoline used per person, driver, vehicle and household is below rates in 1984, when the study was first conducted, according to researcher Michael Sivak of the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.

In 2013, gallons of gasoline consumed per person (392) fell 17 percent from 2004, gallons used per driver (583) fell 16 percent, and gallons used per household (1,011) fell 19 percent. 2004 was the year of maximum consumption for those categories.

Gallons used per vehicle (524) dipped 14 percent from 2003, which was its maximum consumption year.

Even though population grew 8 percent from 2004 to 2013, total fuel consumed by light vehicles decreased 11 percent, Sivak said in a statement.

In 1984, annual fuel consumption rates were slightly higher than in 2013: 400 gallons per person, 608 gallons per driver, 602 gallons per vehicle and 1,106 gallons per household.

The study also found that the number of vehicles and distance driven per person, driver, vehicle and household are at their lowest since the 1990s, the statement said.

The declining number is driven not only by economic factors, but also rises in telecommuting and use of public transportation, Sivak said.

“The reductions in the fuel-consumption rates reflect, in part, the added contribution of the improvements in vehicle fuel economy,” he said in a news release.

“Per person, per driver and per household -- we now have fewer light-duty vehicles, we drive each of them less and we consume less fuel than in the past,” Sivak added.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20150325/OEM06/150329911/average-u.s.-gasoline-usage-lowest-in-3-decades-study-says

The less impressive parts of the present trends are the worsening environmental damage due to population overshoot, the huge influx of undocumented population, the reduced healthcare services that accompany the failure of Obamacare for those still working, the increasing racial strife, and most of all, the upswing of toxic bipartisan politics.

Kunstler was correct IMHO, the Long Emergency has begun - and has been underway since the economic conniption of 2008. Doom is ever so softly and slowly approaching.

[GHung]

Ibon said; "And if you do believe that these actions will sustain you through a collapse of BAU, then who am I to poke a hole in your illusion. "

Not sure why you continue to boil things down to this. I began reducing my reliance on hyper-complex systems well before I became aware of how seriously things are playing out. A general decline scenario, both economic and environmental, was obvious, and I began making arrangements that made the most sense, at least for me and mine. I've been focussing on adapting rather than doom, mainly because doom-focus is a waste of time.

Besides, I like living this way. Watching my contemporaries getting bogged down in complexity, much of which they have no hope of understanding, while deluding myself that this lifestyle was expected and inevitable seemed like a helluva way to waste a life. Besides taxes, we get about 3 bills per month now (two of which could be eliminated), two bank statements, and a shitload of junk mail offering up easy credit or trying to get us to part with our money. Out of the many things that arrived in our mailbox this week, only two required any attention at all. Most of the rest makes pretty good fuel. It's possible to ignore most of the demands our society places on us without any repercussions what-so-ever, and, yes, I think that translates to more resilience. It's about avoiding traps.

I have no delusions about what the future holds, either way. I just hope to watch it play out from the cheap seats, and have no expectations about affecting the overall human experiment in any way that matters.

[Hawkcreek]

Ghung :" Most folks don't have any Plan B at all. Further, out of necessity, most of our kids are living in the BAU world, are aware how things are changing, and have us as their Plan B, if/when TSHTF."

You are right . the young ones use the older folks as a plan B, and I guess thats allrigth somehow, but that only put a greater responsibility on us.
The youngs are struggling wih kids, bills and carrier, so let it be us -the older ones -that take care of the "hypothetical" situation where plan B is needed. That is a great job for the older generation.

I like Ghung's Plan B. I have been doing almost the same thing for years.
And I did it with the plain intention of making a refuge available for my kids and grandkids if they ever needed it.
Meanwhile, it allows me to live with almost no bills, travel whenever I want, and sleep in the fresh air with NO noise around me when I am on my hill. As I get older, I appreciate silence more and more.
We all make choices about insurance. My insurance is about a lifestyle based on needing the BAU world as little as possible.
Some people choose not to have any insurance. Usually that is based either on a belief that they will never need it, or on not having anyone they care about, who would benefit from the resources of the insurance.
The first belief is foolish, in my opinion. The second case is sad.

[Ibon]

Ibon said; "And if you do believe that these actions will sustain you through a collapse of BAU, then who am I to poke a hole in your illusion. "

Not sure why you continue to boil things down to this. I began reducing my reliance on hyper-complex systems well before I became aware of how seriously things are playing out. A general decline scenario, both economic and environmental, was obvious, and I began making arrangements that made the most sense, at least for me and mine. I've been focussing on adapting rather than doom, mainly because doom-focus is a waste of time.

Besides, I like living this way. Watching my contemporaries getting bogged down in complexity, much of which they have no hope of understanding, while deluding myself that this lifestyle was expected and inevitable seemed like a helluva way to waste a life. Besides taxes, we get about 3 bills per month now (two of which could be eliminated), two bank statements, and a shitload of junk mail offering up easy credit or trying to get us to part with our money. Out of the many things that arrived in our mailbox this week, only two required any attention at all. Most of the rest makes pretty good fuel. It's possible to ignore most of the demands our society places on us without any repercussions what-so-ever, and, yes, I think that translates to more resilience. It's about avoiding traps.

I have no delusions about what the future holds, either way. I just hope to watch it play out from the cheap seats, and have no expectations about affecting the overall human experiment in any way that matters.

Reading your posts and orientation I can only say you are on the right track. Something others might benefit from. Exactly as you say is what I did starting some 30 years ago. I never bought a new car, always used. We always lived in small homes and always paid off the mortgage as fast as possible. We have always gardened, my recreation was in a tent or canoe or a used flatsboat I bought while living in Florida. We have always been frugal, besides mortgage on our home never accumulated debt. The credit cards we have had were always paid at the end of the month and we have never had credit card debt since day one. So yes, this orientation afforded me to save enough money, to separate myself from the complexity that enslaved many around me, It permitted us to live the life we do today, storing away nuts and the business success was not channeled into materialism, my friends who have known me for 20 years always heard me talk about one day unplugging and going to the mountains somewhere in the neo-tropics. If you want to achieve something similar one day you have to be singularly focused, not just with your dream but with your finances. Frugality means you are free from the machine. You seem to be doing something similar. I salute you.

My only point in all of this debate is to not have any illusions as to the degree of independence you can actually achieve from the status quo. In spite of all your frugality, all your McGuiver talents, in spite of all the sustainable infrastructure you one day achieve in this creative process, there is only so much resiliency you can build in if the status quo out there falls into serious collapse. What I am also saying is allow this creative process to stand on its own feet, not to be anchored in the illusion that if TSHTF you can actually better your odds all that much. The moment is all you have. I am hammering on this point because I have met many folks wanting to achieve a degree of control in their lives around sustainable living. Many however seem to prop up this narrative with less focus on the moment and hinging this all on prepping for the big fall. This orientation has two fallacies, one, this takes you out of the moment and secondly, folks tend to way over estimate their ability to really persevere without society at large remaining resilient and stable.

There are a million creative reasons for choosing to live a sustainable lifestyle that have nothing to do with prepping for some future collapse. That is also my point. Nothing more.

We are not really debating, just exploring some of the deeper motives behind choosing such a life, and I always tend to like to strip away things down to their core and separate reality from illusion. Many folks are simply delusional about the degree of independence they think they can actually achieve without the greater society remaining intact and robust.

[Hawkcreek]

What I am also saying is allow this creative process to stand on its own feet, not to be anchored in the illusion that if TSHTF you can actually better your odds all that much.

That is one point that I totally disagree with.
I'm an old Marine, and we are taught from day one that proper training and preparation will affect your chances of survival in a cluster-f**k situation.
Individually, no one is guaranteed survival in a firefight. It is all about luck when the s**t starts flying. But the ones who are mentally and physically prepared, and who have taken care of their equipment and weapons, will have a much better chance than those who haven't.
If you don't prepare, you die easy.
It may just be my age, but I look at the world to come as a battle, not just a "accept whatever comes with an interested look on my face" type situation.