I was listening to the show from last night, and I don't understand something that TFM was saying: I don't understand the logical leap made from what is currently happening to BRICS will fall to the West.
If I understand correctly (correct me if I'm wrong), because Russia hasn't dropped the hammer on Ukraine and because the western media is talking openly about tactical nukes and how Iran is smart for not attacking Israel, therefore the non-west will not retaliate and surrender.
Furthermore, why does it matter what the media is saying, even if the media is an accurate reflection of the Regime's thoughts on the state of the world?
They're effectively a wife telling her friends that she wears the pants in the relationship. Who cares what she says? Who pays the bills in this analogy: Who still has the economic and strategic advantage right now? BRICS.
I hope someone can explain this because I don't know what I'm missing with why TFM took this angle.
@UncleIroh
Given these countries' behaviors, it seems they do not feel compelled to act with haste, which makes sense. They do not seem to emotionally expect or need the "touchdown", "knockout punch" victory.
Even if Russia and Iran know that nuclear war is on the horizon, since time is on their side, why would they not continue to bleed the Regime? What have they to gain by striking now?
@UncleIroh I'm happy to see someone use IFF correctly.
@DoubleD
Mostly nothing, except as TFM puts it, the appearance of "cucking" in the West's eyes as their respective red lines are continually crossed.
Yes, weakness does indeed invite aggression, but that only holds IFF the West genuinely believes that the BRICS alliance is weaker.
If we cannot provoke them into a war then the true test will be the expected false flags that we deploy to force a fight. Out "leaders" are out of time & resources and thus desperate for any legitimate casus belli.