Rising Geopolitical Risks and War Cycles

It’s happening on cue: Over the last few days, some of the world’s most volatile nations are provoking the Trump administration big-time. Consider what’s happened …

Test #1. North Korea test-launched a new ballistic missile into the East Sea. The U.N. Security Council and Japanese Prime Minister Abe strongly condemned the act. President Trump says the U.S. has Japan’s back — but we both know that’s not going to deter North Korea’s military ambitions. It failed to stop the previous four launches.

What we know: North Korea is making great strides in advancing their nuclear arsenal, with a new mobile launching system and the use of solid (nuclear) fuel. The ultimate goal: Attacking the U.S. and its allies. This new arsenal is harder to detect and increases its range — both providing a greater threat to national security.

Test #2. Russia spy ship spotted cruising along the Eastern U.S. seaboard. The ship is armed with surface-to-air missiles and is used to intercept communications.

Test #3. Four Russian jets fly within 200 yards of U.S. Navy destroyer USS Porter in the Black Sea. Interestingly, the Russian jets had transponders off and unable to acknowledge multiple radio calls from the American warship.

Test #4. There were reports this week that Russia deployed a new type of nuclear cruise missile that’s in direct conflict with the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with the U.S.

Just Coincidence?

It’s interesting how all these events are developing like a carefully orchestrated mission – in line with my war cycle forecasts.

Perhaps that’s why U.S. Defense Chief “Mad dog” Mattis prodded NATO member countries to pony up more capital into the defense fund. In fact, he’s looked for 2% of their GDP.

It’s going to cost more to defend Western values in a challenging global environment.

Officials from Germany and the U.K. agree, seeing the writing on the wall: It’s going to cost more to defend Western values in a challenging global environment.

But that’s exactly what I’ve been warning about since debuting forecasts of my war cycle research in December 2013. I said back then that the world would experience an environment of rising domestic and international unrest until at least 2020.

And that’s coming true in spades.

This geo-political hotbed could cause all kinds of economic and financial repercussions that could strip you of your wealth in the months and years ahead OR present once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to protect you and yours.

But it all depends on the quality of your guidance — and your ability to think for yourself, especially in times like these.

I know which way I’m headed … and which way I’m taking my subscribers and members.

Do you?

Best wishes,

Larry

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments 31

  1. Gerald Tanenbaum February 17, 2017

    Larry,
    Let’s get real! North Korea’s Kim may be a bit rash, but he’s not stupid. If he isn’t eradicated from within as I believe he will be, he won’t attack the U.S. with a nuclear or any other type of missile. Why? Because he and his entourage know well enough that the U.S. will retaliate in kind. Also, China isn’t about to cut their collective throats and chance losing one of their biggest consumers to a war with No. Korea. China is having big time financial difficulties and certainly doesn’t want a major influx of displaced No. Koreans to whom they may have to feed and provide with medical care.
    I think if push comes to shove, China will clamp the lid on Kim one way or the other. Also, So. Korea and our 50,000 troops are not going to sit idly by. My opinion.

    Reply

    • Alfred Bledel February 18, 2017

      I agree absolutely

      Reply

  2. Kenneth Harmon February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    While you indicate in various articles that the War Cycles peak circa 2020/2021, how long will the current “War Window” last beyond that time?. In one of your articles a few years ago you suggested that tensions may stay elevated through 2027. So how do you see the 2021-2025 period developing in relation to the War Cycles, and even if we are beyond the absolute peak in 2020/2021?

    Reply

    • BC in Europe February 18, 2017

      I’ve heard American experts on the matter indicate that the US won’t be out of Afghanistan in the lifetime of anyone reading this. Fifty + years.

      Reply

  3. Kenneth Harmon February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    While you indicate in various articles that the War Cycles peak circa 2020/2021, how long will the current “War Window” last beyond that time?. In one of your articles a few years ago you suggested that tensions may stay elevated through 2027. So how do you see the 2021-2025 period developing in relation to the War Cycles, and even if we are beyond the absolute peak in 2020/2021?

    Reply

    • BC in Europe February 18, 2017

      I’ve heard American experts on the matter indicate that the US won’t be out of Afghanistan in the lifetime of anyone reading this. Fifty + years.

      Reply

  4. Kenneth Harmon February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    While you indicate in various articles that the War Cycles peak circa 2020/2021, how long will the current “War Window” last beyond that time?. In one of your articles a few years ago you suggested that tensions may stay elevated through 2027. So how do you see the 2021-2025 period developing in relation to the War Cycles, and even if we are beyond the absolute peak in 2020/2021?

    Reply

    • BC in Europe February 18, 2017

      I’ve heard American experts on the matter indicate that the US won’t be out of Afghanistan in the lifetime of anyone reading this. Fifty + years.

      Reply

  5. Jonathan February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    Germany & most EU Countries have already bent over and given up on western values by their open border policies they have set the stage for civil war in the Eurozone in the not so distant future.

    Reply

  6. Jonathan February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    Germany & most EU Countries have already bent over and given up on western values by their open border policies they have set the stage for civil war in the Eurozone in the not so distant future.

    Reply

  7. Jonathan February 17, 2017

    Larry,

    Germany & most EU Countries have already bent over and given up on western values by their open border policies they have set the stage for civil war in the Eurozone in the not so distant future.

    Reply

  8. John Tracy February 17, 2017

    “solid (nuclear) fuel”

    What has a solid fueled rocket (vs. liquid fueled) have to do with nuclear? The significance of this development is that solid fuel rockets don’t require ancillary equipment (e.g. trucks with liquid fuel and oxidizer) and can be launched with much less preparation. Also, as this was “cold launched” (ignited after being ejected from the launcher) means the launcher is not damaged and can be reloaded quicker.

    Reply

  9. John Tracy February 17, 2017

    “solid (nuclear) fuel”

    What has a solid fueled rocket (vs. liquid fueled) have to do with nuclear? The significance of this development is that solid fuel rockets don’t require ancillary equipment (e.g. trucks with liquid fuel and oxidizer) and can be launched with much less preparation. Also, as this was “cold launched” (ignited after being ejected from the launcher) means the launcher is not damaged and can be reloaded quicker.

    Reply

  10. John Tracy February 17, 2017

    “solid (nuclear) fuel”

    What has a solid fueled rocket (vs. liquid fueled) have to do with nuclear? The significance of this development is that solid fuel rockets don’t require ancillary equipment (e.g. trucks with liquid fuel and oxidizer) and can be launched with much less preparation. Also, as this was “cold launched” (ignited after being ejected from the launcher) means the launcher is not damaged and can be reloaded quicker.

    Reply

  11. Kenneth Heck February 17, 2017

    It has been argued that the world would be better off with more frequent small wars, rather than suppressing them and allowing pressure to build up to trigger massively destructive great wars. Nuclear weaponry is the new card in the deck which renders the usual warfare calculations obsolete, especially when countries like North Korea possess nuclear weapons. War cycles are useful, but where the cycles are increasing in amplitude, there is no guarantee they will ever return back to normal. This is why governments are beginning to use non-standard methods to envision the future – namely psychics, remote viewing, even visionaries and so-called prophets. What are they saying currently? They say we will survive as a species, but what we fear the most will be coming upon us. The past will be permanently left behind, and our environment will be substantially altered. We will probably be openly dealing with aliens of higher than human intelligence. Priorities in the long term will be radically different from those of today. My vote is for small, cyclical wars rather than the great ones.

    Reply

  12. Kenneth Heck February 17, 2017

    It has been argued that the world would be better off with more frequent small wars, rather than suppressing them and allowing pressure to build up to trigger massively destructive great wars. Nuclear weaponry is the new card in the deck which renders the usual warfare calculations obsolete, especially when countries like North Korea possess nuclear weapons. War cycles are useful, but where the cycles are increasing in amplitude, there is no guarantee they will ever return back to normal. This is why governments are beginning to use non-standard methods to envision the future – namely psychics, remote viewing, even visionaries and so-called prophets. What are they saying currently? They say we will survive as a species, but what we fear the most will be coming upon us. The past will be permanently left behind, and our environment will be substantially altered. We will probably be openly dealing with aliens of higher than human intelligence. Priorities in the long term will be radically different from those of today. My vote is for small, cyclical wars rather than the great ones.

    Reply

  13. Kenneth Heck February 17, 2017

    It has been argued that the world would be better off with more frequent small wars, rather than suppressing them and allowing pressure to build up to trigger massively destructive great wars. Nuclear weaponry is the new card in the deck which renders the usual warfare calculations obsolete, especially when countries like North Korea possess nuclear weapons. War cycles are useful, but where the cycles are increasing in amplitude, there is no guarantee they will ever return back to normal. This is why governments are beginning to use non-standard methods to envision the future – namely psychics, remote viewing, even visionaries and so-called prophets. What are they saying currently? They say we will survive as a species, but what we fear the most will be coming upon us. The past will be permanently left behind, and our environment will be substantially altered. We will probably be openly dealing with aliens of higher than human intelligence. Priorities in the long term will be radically different from those of today. My vote is for small, cyclical wars rather than the great ones.

    Reply

  14. N B B February 17, 2017

    Larry, without China North Korea doesn’t have the ability to keep its simple lights on let alone having the power for missiles that could reach USA soil. If I may; how about instead, inviting your readers and together demand of the Globe’s powerful leaders (beginning with USA) to seriously engage in the act of entirely eliminating nuclear weapons within a year — year 2017. Simultaneously, demand that they prohibit the fabrication of new ones across this alive Orb, thus liberating this magnetic Earth’s world of their diabolical and ultra merciless and sadistic nuclear weapons. And while highly anomalous (not human), nevertheless, these are weapons that they treasure and warship maximally and with which of course, they threaten this miraculous Earth’s world unremittingly. Of course, need not tell you, but as is, they keep these diabolical creations of their in piles by the thousands (on land, in water and in the air) and ready to be used..

    Reply

  15. N B B February 17, 2017

    Larry, without China North Korea doesn’t have the ability to keep its simple lights on let alone having the power for missiles that could reach USA soil. If I may; how about instead, inviting your readers and together demand of the Globe’s powerful leaders (beginning with USA) to seriously engage in the act of entirely eliminating nuclear weapons within a year — year 2017. Simultaneously, demand that they prohibit the fabrication of new ones across this alive Orb, thus liberating this magnetic Earth’s world of their diabolical and ultra merciless and sadistic nuclear weapons. And while highly anomalous (not human), nevertheless, these are weapons that they treasure and warship maximally and with which of course, they threaten this miraculous Earth’s world unremittingly. Of course, need not tell you, but as is, they keep these diabolical creations of their in piles by the thousands (on land, in water and in the air) and ready to be used..

    Reply

  16. WBM February 18, 2017

    Larry:
    Would you please publish your current AI on DJIA? I am looking at the one you posted 1/20/2017 and find it’s not showing what is happening. Could you please explain?
    Thanks;
    Mac

    Reply

  17. WBM February 18, 2017

    Larry:
    Would you please publish your current AI on DJIA? I am looking at the one you posted 1/20/2017 and find it’s not showing what is happening. Could you please explain?
    Thanks;
    Mac

    Reply

  18. Edward February 18, 2017

    Mr Tanenbaum:
    I don’t think North Korea is the one that is sending a message to USA. On my view it’s China. NK is a facade. China is just telling USA with diplomacy that they also may be though. Not everybody communicates as Trump

    Reply

  19. Edward February 18, 2017

    Mr Tanenbaum:
    I don’t think North Korea is the one that is sending a message to USA. On my view it’s China. NK is a facade. China is just telling USA with diplomacy that they also may be though. Not everybody communicates as Trump

    Reply

  20. Dick Lund February 18, 2017

    I’m a subscriber and no I don’t know where your going. Other then owning some defense stock’s. Dickie

    Reply

  21. Dick Lund February 18, 2017

    I’m a subscriber and no I don’t know where your going. Other then owning some defense stock’s. Dickie

    Reply

  22. Dick Lund February 18, 2017

    I’m a subscriber and no I don’t know where your going. Other then owning some defense stock’s. Dickie

    Reply

  23. Nick February 22, 2017

    With world and domestic tensions rising and the sovereign debt issue worsening isn’t it inevitable that gold prices will rise? What in the world could possibly cause it to go lower. It seems the downside is almost non-existent. Shouldn’t we be backing up our trucks now?

    Reply

  24. russian bear February 23, 2017

    “The ultimate goal: Attacking the U.S. and its allies. ”
    oh dear, oh my paws and whiskers (c) rabbit in Alice’s wonderland
    yanks are you indeed flying off the handle ??? north korea only wants to be left alone – from you global democratizers – just as RUSSIA wants – only do NOT to impinge on us, koreans (and russians) – we only want to rest in peace

    Reply

  25. James March 11, 2017

    If you look back in history at the first 30 years of the new century there is a major war. The clock is ticking. Who will ignite the spark Iran, Russia, Noth Koreans, China or islamic extremist?
    Former President Obama said you were living in the safest times.

    Reply