Top Economic Advisers Forecast War and Unrest

Kyle Bass, Larry Edelson, Charles Nenner, James Dines, Nouriel Roubini, Jim Rogers, Marc Faber, Jim Rickards and Martin Armstrong Warn or War

We’re already at war in numerous countries all over the world.

But top economic advisers warn that economic factors could lead to a new world war.

Kyle Bass writes:

Trillions of dollars of debts will be restructured and millions of financially prudent savers will lose large percentages of their real purchasing power at exactly the wrong time in their lives. Again, the world will not end, but the social fabric of the profligate nations will be stretched and in some cases torn. Sadly, looking back through economic history, all too often war is the manifestation of simple economic entropy played to its logical conclusion. We believe that war is an inevitable consequence of the current global economic situation.

Larry Edelson wrote an email to subscribers entitled “What the “Cycles of War” are saying for 2013″, which states:

Since the 1980s, I’ve been studying the so-called “cycles of war” — the natural rhythms that predispose societies to descend into chaos, into hatred, into civil and even international war.

I’m certainly not the first person to examine these very distinctive patterns in history. There have been many before me, notably, Raymond Wheeler, who published the most authoritative chronicle of war ever, covering a period of 2,600 years of data.

However, there are very few people who are willing to even discuss the issue right now. And based on what I’m seeing, the implications could be absolutely huge in 2013.

Former Goldman Sachs technical analyst Charles Nenner – who has made some big accurate calls, and counts major hedge funds, banks, brokerage houses, and high net worth individuals as clients – says there will be “a major war starting at the end of 2012 to 2013”, which will drive the Dow to 5,000.

Veteran investor adviser James Dines forecast a war is epochal as World Wars I and II, starting in the Middle East.

Nouriel Roubini has warned of war with Iran. And when Roubini was asked:

Where does this all lead us? The risk in your view is of another Great Depression. But even respectable European politicians are talking not just an economic depression but possibly even worse consequences over the next decade or so. Bearing European history in mind, where does this take us?

He responded:

In the 1930s, because we made a major policy mistake, we went through financial instability, defaults, currency devaluations, printing money, capital controls, trade wars, populism, a bunch of radical, populist, aggressive regimes coming to power from Germany to Italy to Spain to Japan, and then we ended up with World War II.

Now I’m not predicting World War III but seriously, if there was a global financial crisis after the first one, then we go into depression: the political and social instability in Europe and other advanced economies is going to become extremely severe. And that’s something we have to worry about.

Billionaire investor Jim Rogers notes:

A continuation of bailouts in Europe could ultimately spark another world war, says international investor Jim Rogers.


“Add debt, the situation gets worse, and eventually it just collapses. Then everybody is looking for scapegoats. Politicians blame foreigners, and we’re in World War II or World War whatever.”

Marc Faber says that the American government will start new wars in response to the economic crisis:

We’re in the middle of a global currency war – i.e. a situation where nations all compete to devalue their currencies the most in order to boost exports. And Brazilian president-elect Rousseff said in 2010:

The last time there was a series of competitive devaluations … it ended in world war two.

Jim Rickards agrees:

Currency wars lead to trade wars, which often lead to hot wars. In 2009, Rickards participated in the Pentagon’s first-ever “financial” war games. While expressing confidence in America’s ability to defeat any other nation-state in battle, Rickards says the U.S. could get dragged into “asymmetric warfare,” if currency wars lead to rising inflation and global economic uncertainty.

As does Jim Rogers:

Trade wars always lead to wars.

Martin Armstrong wrote in August:

Our greatest problem is the bureaucracy wants a war. This will distract everyone from the NSA and justify what they have been doing. They need a distraction for the economic decline that is coming.

Armstrong argued last month that war plans against Syria are really about debt and spending:

The Syrian mess seems to have people lining up on Capital Hill when sources there say the phone calls coming in are overwhelmingly against any action. The politicians are ignoring the people entirely. This suggests there is indeed a secret agenda to achieve a goal outside the discussion box. That is most like the debt problem and a war is necessary to relief the pressure to curtail spending.

And given that many influential economists wrongly believe that war is good for the economy … many are overtly or quietly pushing for war.

Moreover, former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan said that the Iraq war was really about oil , and former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. And see this and this. If that war was for petroleum, other oil-rich countries might be invaded as well.

And the American policy of using the military to contain China’s growing economic influence – and of considering economic rivalry to be a basis for war – are creating a tinderbox.

Finally, multi-billionaire investor Hugo Salinas Price says:

What happened to [Libya’s] Mr. Gaddafi, many speculate the real reason he was ousted was that he was planning an all-African currency for conducting trade. The same thing happened to him that happened to Saddam because the US doesn’t want any solid competing currency out there vs the dollar. You know Gaddafi was talking about a gold dinar.

Indeed, senior CNBC editor John Carney noted:

Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.

Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal thinks the central banking initiative reveals that foreign powers may have a strong influence over the rebels.

This suggests we have a bit more than a ragtag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences. “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” Wenzel writes.

Indeed, some say that recent wars have really been about bringing all countries into the fold of Western central banking.

Many Warn of Unrest

Numerous economic organizations and economists also warn of crash-induced unrest, including:

This entry was posted in Business / Economics, Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Top Economic Advisers Forecast War and Unrest

  1. Troy Ounce says:

    Naaah, with all those muppets in the US and EU governments can safely take away 50% of the wealth of the population:
    1. because they do not understand
    2. because they do not care
    3. as long as the TV is switched on

  2. jadan says:

    Why is the opinion of Jim Rogers quoted as an authority? The man is a parasite speculator. The great unease felt by the wealthy, which is what this article is about, comes from their fear that the large mass of people will become unmanageable. “Populist” and “populism” are universally disparaged by the elite and their apologists. The predatory system of finance embodied in the Fed and the ECB, headquartered at the BIS in Basel is the cause of the problems here described. What the elite fears is a system that no longer serves and supports them. THEY will start wars, THEY will sacrifice as many as required to keep themselves in power. The people are fodder for their machinations.

    On the other hand, if governments were to put in place systems of finance not built on usury exploitation of the masses which provide for the equitable distribution of credit, in other words, populist financial solutions sometimes called public banking, the economic pressure for war would be alleviated. But, the elite, and the US in particular, resist any populist solution. Witness the liquidation of Mohamar Gaddafi and his banking system, which was far more equitable than anything in the west. It is Obama and the elite he represents that foment wars.

    That being said, our world is going to hell in a hurry and that anxiety alone creates wars. The Big Picture is lost in the chaos of events over which we have no control. Fukushima is front and center, but that does not mean the destruction of the Gulf of Mexico by BP isn’t continuing every day. We sacrifice clean water for oil & gas. Governments have no blueprint for a future. in the US, the future is defined through a fascist model of centralized control. It is anti-chaos, a reactionary vision. The same is true for the EU. Such central control already exists in the PRC, and in Russia, there are clearly defined do’s and don’ts under Putin. The attitude of every nation is reactionary at the core because there is no vision of a sustainable future for all.

    Grin and bear it.

    • Steven says:

      THEY no longer need ‘the people’ – or at least they only need enough of them to operate THEIR machines. There is a great continuity in history starting with the Enclosure Movement and Industrial Revolution in England. Ruling classes have pursued getting rid of the people with a remarkable single-mindedness of purpose. For the feudal landlords, sheep were more profitable and easier to manage than people. (That was before Edward Bernays and modern mass media.) Their ancient feudal obligation to provide THEIR peasants with enough land to feed themselves and their families proved no more of an obstacle than the logically inferred obligation of a ruling class that never tires of telling ‘the people’ they must work to eat – even as they continue bundling up the factories they already automated and sending them to Asia.

      Mitt Romney was the ultimate joke, the ultimate show of contempt for American democracy – a choice between Wall Street’s man in Washington and someone who accuses half the American people of being leaches while he enjoys the money he earned ‘honestly ‘ by sending them to the unemployment office. I saw a great bumper sticker yesterday: “You can’t work at jobs that don’t exist.”

  3. Steven says:

    Combine human ingenuity and fossil fuels with
    unbounded greed and lust for power and you get – war. Not just any
    war but the deadliest with the most diabolical weapons that ingenuity
    can devise. As the various authorities quoted observe, we have been
    down this road before at least twice in the 20th century.
    European ruling classes at the time could have used victories in the
    struggle for subsistence won by the Industrial Revolution to turn the
    working class into the leisure class. They chose instead to go after
    their neighbors’ possessions. Perhaps those ruling classes were (and
    remain) afraid of what might happen if they gave ‘the people’ the
    time – and the information – to think?

    At the bottom of
    it all, of course, is money. For people who already have more than
    they could spend in several lifetimes, its only real use is keeping
    score in a game to get more money. Like Monopoly, there is no real
    limit to the amount of money you can use to play the game. The
    trouble starts when you attempt to spend that Monopoly money in the
    real world.

    The Nobel Prize winning chemist (a real science
    as opposed to economics) Frederick Soddy figured all this out almost
    a century ago. If you haven’t read his “Wealth, Virtual Wealth and
    Debt” (2nd edition if you can get it), check it out. It
    is probably too late to derive any useful information from it. But
    it will give you something to do while we wait for our leaders on
    Wall Street and their minions in Washington to place the ultimate
    (loosing – like most of the bets they have placed since they
    decided to financialize the US economy in the 1970s) bet.

    Oh, and while you
    are at it check out Michael Hudson’s “Super Imperialism”. Even
    better than having money these days is having the ability to create
    it, whether you are a country (the US), a Congress passing out
    rewards to contributing constituents or a Wall Street ‘financial
    engineer’. When you want to ‘printing money’ i.e. adding to “debts
    that can’t be repaid (and) won’t be”, it is absolutely critical you
    continue to pay the interest on the debt you already owe.

  4. jacklohman says:

    Our “Economic Advisers” are terribly single-focused. YES we are at war. WHY? Because of campaign cash flowing between the defense manufacturers and the politicians calling the shots. It’s called “cause and effect” with the cause being the cash and the effect being the war. ONLY public funding of campaigns will turn the country back to its owners.

    • Voice of Reason says:

      Let’s take this a little further. If we weren’t at war, what would we do with all the ‘useless eaters’? Remember, for the last 300 years we have been replacing them with machines and computers – and for the last 3 decades with off-shored, sweatshop (to put it mildly) labor. We could, of course, free them – let them become members of the Leisure Class, only without all the trappings of conspicuous consumption.

      But odds are many of those so freed to find their own meaning and purpose in life would be deeply unsettled by the experience. One could be optimistic and say “let’s take the risk. After all, we’ve tried everything else including world wars.” Unfortunately, things aren’t that simple. Those idle minds might just get to poking around in their past, taking a serious look at ‘the system’. And if they don’t like what they find, they could get really sore.

      Nah! such worry warts underestimate the power of ‘public diplomacy’ and the mass media. I say let’s give the following a try:
      . nobody works unless they have something to contribute that the public really needs
      . BUT nobody dies from hunger, lack of medical care, etc – OR WARS.

      • jacklohman says:

        First things first. Let’s get the politicians off the payroll of the defense industry (and oil and fracking and everything else). With public funding of campaigns. THEN they will fix the job market here and put our vets to work HERE. But until we wake up the voters, even that won’t happen. We need a near-100% turnover in 2014.

    • Dale A says:

      The biggest slice of campaign dollars comes from those who can legally create it out of thin air, banksters.

  5. gozounlimited says:

    Bail-In? or Bail-Out? That is the question…….

  6. European American says:

    Jim Rogers Net Worth is $300 Million… he’s not a billionaire.

    The “War thing” is not a given.

  7. Bry says:

    I have studied what wars do to the stock market, and my bet would be to go long. Wars do not crash to stock market. Wars make the market go up. I am not at all pro-war. I am just stating the facts.

    • tvdog says:

      … unless you are on the losing side. Or one of the countries caught in the middle. WWII was great for the U.S., not so good for Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, etc., etc.

  8. Default says:

    “If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.” Gutle Schnaper Rothschild

  9. racman63 says:

    What a crap fest.

  10. gannamede says:

    You know, it doesn’t take a genius to follow the money trail left by our dollars, it doesn’t just evaporate, it goes someplace. Now, figure out who’s getting richer by the day despite the suffering of the hoards who actually perform the labors. It’s going to lead you straight to the moneychangers who produce nothing, yet profit immensely from the misfortunes of the ones who do produce. Debt is one of the lowest forms of thievery, the child of want, and the father of misery. Those to whom we owe more than we can ever hope to pay accumulated it by cunning, not by earning. Don’t be fooled by the misleading rhetoric about the big industrialists ruining the world economy, most of them are now fighting for their own lives against the same evil every working soul on earth is now beginning to support (by force if necessary) and are still losing ground. “Economists” everywhere indignantly scoff at such warnings as this, and can produce blinding storms of technical proofs of the sophomoric oversimplifications of what is, in the best traditions of classical logic, an actual “under simplification” of a hellish device that absolutely can lead to actual war, usually disguised as religion or politics, as it has done over and over since time immemorial. We’re trying, and failing, to follow a path to reason that leads into a well designed smog of deception so dense it simply cannot be penetrated because the the deceptions can be rearranged before our faces and we’re unable to see it happen. When private money reaches sums so vast that governments can be bought, war will not be far behind. We are now at that very threshold, and even those who cannot or will not see the preparations can feel that something dreadful is imminent. If you choose to ignore that premonition you will be taken off guard and thrown into a life or death struggle not of your making. This is not prophecy, nor is it the rant of an activist; it is very simply the study of the history of wars, and it’s there for anyone who cares to take the time look at it.

  11. Stan says:

    The poor Banksters are just stressed out by their failure to convince us of their truly magnanimous nature and the efforts they have made to “protect” us from ourselves.
    We should be truly grateful of their efforts and throw an exclusive party for them so they can relax.
    How about an invitation to the glorious “Lamp Post Ballroom” for rope dancing instructions? That should make their nerves dead calm.

  12. Azsteve53 says:

    In places like Greece, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus to name just a few, there is dramatic social unrest over austerity programs. Bankers do not want to lose out on profits, war is preferable to them if they stand to lose money.

Leave a Reply

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