The Global Belt & Road Initiative: Thoughts and Drawings From The Black Binder Regarding Strategies and Tactics

[beaver]

I’ve divided this thread into 3 sections:

1. The Americas
2. Iran, Russia, and Eastern Europe
3. Russia, China, and Japan

These are relatively rudimentary notes and drawings and when I look back on when I started questioning what might be going on, it started 16 years ago, but became ‘real’ in late 2018 when we read USMCA. I know you all are sick of hearing it, but the legislation says everything, regardless of what you see and hear from politicians, financiers, and in news, whether mainstream or most alternative channels. I am not attempting to explain things such as digital currencies, chemtrails, or other ideas; this is standing back and looking at the BIGGER parts of the plan(s). The areas I listed above are the only ones that I think I have a pretty good grasp on; others, not so much, yet, if at all.

The plans for The Americas are solidly mine; nobody else has even mentioned the possibility. I take full credit for it being right or wrong, whatever the outcome. The others are a combination of opinions, and information that you might or might not be aware of, and some thoughts about what the positives, or, negatives could be for a particular side(s). I do take into account the personalities of the leaders involved, as it tells us so much of what lengths they might go to achieve their goals, stop others from their goals, or, in order how they might act in order to increase their territory.

About the percentages that I give to each scenario, they are not ‘probabilities’, nor prognostication, they are bonafide WORK DONE in order to achieve the goal(s) as set forth in my hypotheses. The percentage is tangible, actual work done, and can be seen, in person, or, satellite, and other views, etc. Hypotheses = By comparing different hypotheses , the team aimed to find the most plausible explanation for the phenomenon.

Whether you agree in part, or, not at all with what I’m presenting, please have the moxy to start a thread and post your own “Black Binder” information and ideas. I have to convert to .jpg, as this site does not accept .pdf Will continue tomorrow, as internet here keeps going down.

The next post will concern “The Americas”.

[beaver]

Percentage = 75%
It could slow from here as govt works to condemn properties and corporations buy them up; this takes time and paperwork, but it’s really all that’s needed to get started. According to friends, there’s enough abandoned properties to start bringing in simpler equipment designated for port building, but they think it’s hesitation due to legalities, and would be a giveaway to those still around the location(s). Some Californians are already getting the notion that the coastline will be used for porting.

This picture below sat on my desk for 9 years. Some truly brilliant people I worked with couldn’t figure out why Buffett would have bought this RR either. BH does buy properties, but never one like this. Now, I know why.

365 miles of coastline to work with. Yes, there will be high-speed rail, and lots of it. My brother lives in San Fran, and friends visited there 2 weekends ago, says some parts abandoned for 10 blocks from seaside, and more leaving location. Long Beach already has lots of AI, and more to come.

1500 miles cleared with fires, and spurs burned into major areas.

Not even sandbags allowed to bolster crumbling foundations of 5-star hotels on Maui.

The deciding factor…

PORTS! Think about it.

More to come later. Next posts are Iran, Russia, and Eastern Europe.
Sleep for now.

[XSEXCESS]

Clearly you’ve put some thought / work into this. You’ve hit on a theme that is important in some of it and disregarded your own observation in other parts. The best ports are artifacts of the natural shape of the coastline. You don’t have to move mountains to create the ‘good’ port facilities. Let’s look at the California coastline. Charles Dana’s book Two Years Before the Mast is the best (in English) documentation of early California ports I’m aware of (written 1840). The sailing ship he was on visited coastal communities near Monterey, Santa Barbara, and San Diego. There were none in Los Angeles/Long Beach or San Francisco (or further north). They rowed from ship anchorage to near the beach where their longboats ran aground and they had to wade through waist deep water sometimes many yards with dried ‘California Dollar’ (cowskins) balanced on their heads to load cargo onto the sailing ship. No port facilities existed. Since then the currently existing port facilities in the SF bay area, Long Beach, and San Diego have been developed. They used naturally protective coastline structure augmented (Long Beach) by man-made jetties. In all three cases, the natural shape of the coastline is adjacent to relatively flat ground for a distance (mile or so) away from the port facility. It’s easy to build out ground handling infrastructure for cargos.

I don’t dispute your thesis that there’s something up. An example is the planned mega freeway with limited access from south Texas up into the plains states designed to link cargo movement across these states projected for mega development. You make me curious what is the planned southern terminus for that freeway system? Brownsville, Corpus Christi?

On your one point about the coastline between SF and LA…it’s unsuitable for port development with only a couple of exceptions (Monterey, Santa Barbara) because the coastline is immediately adjacent (think cliffs) to tall coastal hills that would make extraordinarily expensive any land-side infrastructure development. The Palisades fire area is the same, although not as bad. The Palisades is yes near the coast but is at least a hundred feet above mean sea level making industrial facilities much harder than elsewhere.

To continue the conversation, I’d ask why do you think there would be a need for some distributed system of coastal ports strung along the California coast vs expansions of the large centralized cargo handling facilities that already exist?

Apply the same logic to the Texas coastline, I think you’re near Houston, where Houston, Rockport, Lavaca, Corpus Christi, Isabel etc exist (with nice flat shoreline real estate to develop). Why would you need New World Order control over the Texas coastline to develop a distributed network of ports when development of mega-ports would be cheaper to connect to inland transportation modes?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m following your analysis and find it interesting. You are likely onto something. Just trying to help you focus your argument.

[beaver]

@XSEXCESS

The best ports are artifacts of the natural shape of the coastline. You don’t have to move mountains to create the ‘good’ port facilities.

The ‘shape’ of the coastline might be radically changed. As for Santa Barbara and San Diego, they are both included; San Diego is already military and a lot of AI, therefore, I didn’t bother with it, and Santa Barbara is in the path drawn. It is not my intention to mark every tittle; there’s 365 miles to work with there.

As for Texas, it might be a good subject for a thread that you originate and work on. I’m sure everyone would love it, I know I would.

Continuing on with views of Iran, Russia, and Eastern Europe later today…

[sharick]

@XSEXCESS

You don’t have to move mountains to create the ‘good’ port facilities.

Uh, don’t underestimate them. In the 50’s, they moved a mountain to put a runway and air station facilities in Subic Bay (Republic of the Philippines). The Army Corps couldn’t do it, so they called in the Seabees.

NAS Cubi Point

I was stationed there in the 80’s supporting P-3 Orions. Like Panama, it was another invaluable asset Jimmy Carter (CFR) gave away.

[XSEXCESS]

A notable feat for sure. Have a friend who was a Seabee. Water depth was probably not too bad for them to do that. Much of the CA coast drops off very quickly from shore so would be hard to fill.

In a world with a soon to start declining population, and being taken over in the future with robotics and AI (the dystopian fear), it’s not clear to me why such huge infrastructure projects would be needed. Colonies of Aliens? Robots pursuing the American Dream? USA is largely shutting down immigration and birth rates are barely at replenishment rates (if that). Where is the projected growth coming from?

[sharick]

@XSEXCESS

it’s not clear to me why such huge infrastructure projects would be needed.

Me neither. As the depopulation schemes expand and succeed, who will be the consumers?

[beaver]

“They” are most likely shipping everything off continent, to the west; so far west, it’s east. Food, minerals, O&G…Everything. They are going to leave us high and dry, literally. They may, or, may not use all the coastline; there’s 375 miles of it, more than sufficient, and they are ready whenever the properties needed are condemned, and title transferred (corporations). When I’m able to get docs scanned into jpeg, or another program this site allows, I was going to explain further. This was a part of the BRI, and a deal made before Trump 1, but reinforced by him through USMCA in 2018. Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean anything. Those who didn’t read The Agreement, won’t see it until equipment is brought in and build-out begins; except for a few Californians who are also, just now, speculating this might be the case. The hiccup in the deal is IRAN, and I will explain why when I upload the rest.

[JFYates]

Who are “they”???

[beaver]

With respect to California, before I post my other material…
Why are they really closing the road(s)? Note location(s), right on the coast.

the great HEIST highway

[beaver]

On to Iran, Russia, and Eastern Europe. The report gives a very good description of what we, and two other groups found in October 2024, PLUS at least 3 more bases further to the east added, although not as elaborate, as yet. I posted a couple of videos on this subject, with flyovers, on the first 3 bases.

Let me just give you the long and the short of it concerning what I, and most of our group thinks ‘the deal’ regarding this section might be, and this is very general. First, we believe the conversation took place during Trumps first administration, due to the high likelihood of Israels’ involvement, and the timing of Russias’ additional military build-up. The conversation was between China, Russia, and The U.S., with a little ‘help’ from Israel on The U.S. side:

China asked for Taiwan, and was granted it. U.S. and The West will put up a bit of a scuffle for the cameras, but essentially, China will get Taiwan.

Russia (Putin), as most of us suspect, wants the lands comprising the old empire during the reign of Catherine The Great. Most of this request was granted, except for Greece, and a couple of others. Putin is to get most, if not all of eastern Europe. Putin agreed to the terms. At the time of this deal, Finland and Sweden were not a part of NATO. I think this is the major reason THE Ukraine was not given membership into NATO; as the conglomerate making the territorial deals is reserving it for Putin, (and still does currently reserve hopes of somehow making a deal with Putin).

The U.S. was the last to request territories, and asked for only one…Iran. Putin flatly refused. Putin, along with Xi walked away from the entire deal-making process, Putin began a massive program of war preps, and has assisted Xi in doing the same, however clumsily Xi might be performing the work. Biden was then allowed to take Office and further weaken Our Country, allowed open borders for NABRI to move forward, all in order to return Trump for a 2nd term, and prepare for war.

From the scuttlebutt I’ve gotten over the past few weeks, go-time for The West is in September, which I think is absolutely insane; insanity is subject to change (for the worse), but that’s what has been mentioned. All this was prior to the actions announced on Diego Garcia. Regardless of attack aircraft, etc., The West must place boots on the ground, and IMO, it’s a losing battle against The Russians. Nobody knows snow like The Russians.

A couple more areas of deadly concern are military preparedness, in which Russia is way ahead, and, what seems to get all ‘empire’ troops in trouble is supply lines. All Russia has to do is ‘walk next door’ to pick up supplies. U.S./NATO, well, you can figure it. Napoleon once said, “An army marches on it’s stomach.” Too bad he forgot about that when he ended up in Russia in the dead of wintertime. Another quote of record by an unknown German woman was noted when U.S. troops marched into WW2 Berlin, “They were polite, but firm with us, at gunpoint, if necessary. They were remarkably well fed!”

The amount of efforts/work performed in order to bring this hypothesis to conclusion is 50%. Some in the group wanted to raise it when preps on Diego Garcia were announced, but I disagreed.

The first couple of maps will be difficult to read, but others will make it much easier. The written report will not load properly, but here is the original link Lee publicly broadcasted:
https://www.youtube.com/live/pmMNXY2aFpk?si=sgnsA7c92NBrzQDB

I wanted to include this general map of The Suwalski Gap, which is being closed now by Russia, and affiliated troops. I was surprised to find that the troops on Russian side is approx. 425K, which NATOs total troops approx. 165K.

[beaver]

Iran would be CRAZY to believe The U.S. and stop its development.

- YouTube

Meanwhile, China/Taiwan:

https://www.youtube.com/live/XvTxg8hXTxc?si=N15pVBJnKrK-c6DZ

[beaver]

It’s not that The West doesn’t have such weapons, it’s that The West hasn’t tested or used them in actual targeted warfare, and THE WEST’S SUPPLY LINES SUCK.

“NATO and World Have Never Seen Such a Weapon,” Putin Unleashes Deadly Oreshnik |From The Frontline

NOTE: Countries listed in the video title, then, look at the map drawn above.

Greece, Sweden, Norway, Finland Ramp Up Military Readiness | Vantage with Palki Sharma | N18G

[beaver]

In and of itself not a big deal, but wait, there’s more.
Will go along with the next portion later today.

U.S. to send long-range surveillance drones to Japan amid Taiwan tensions

[beaver]

When I see Germany getting ‘involved’, I wince. Seems as if September might be correct.

'Nobody wants war' but it could still happen, German Military Historian tells DW | DW News

[beaver]

Make of this what you will.

'CIA, U.S...': Jeffrey Sachs 'UNCOVERS' Jaw-Dropping Israeli-American Plot Against Iran, Arab World

[beaver]

Gee, I have to wonder if they know something BIG is coming? Nice was to chase people out and condemn property.

https://www.youtube.com/live/vY8oMsF-k-8?si=G7uJeEAX1rOiPjBt

[XSEXCESS]

Lots of interesting info Beaver…help me understand what’s going on with the Suwalski gap military presence? What geopolitical moves are behind this?

[beaver]

Suwalki, or, Suwalski Gap (heard it both ways), is the largest and most easily accessible ‘gap’. Although it’s described as ‘hilly’, comparatively speaking, it’s relatively flat. There are more gaps to be closed, but this is the big one. Tanks, other terrain vehicles, and foot soldiers can easily traverse it, compared with the other regions which are more challenging. See the history of Catherine The Great.

Suwałki Gap

[XSEXCESS]

OK, googled Suwalki vs Fulda gap (Fulda being what they taught us was the key land assault path to USSR) and got an AI answer. I assume this is shifted further west as mountains don’t generally move.

Today, the Fulda Gap is likely of little strategic importance, and instead, the new flashpoint could be the Suwałki Gap , a narrow 70km long stretch that for years has been dubbed “ NATO’s Achilles Heel,” and even the “Most Dangerous Place on Earth.” Suwałki Gap : Mind The Gap