Global Collapse – Part 5A: Israel, Could the Stakes be Any Higher?

Hi Everyone,

When I started this series, I intended to divide it into five parts. The fifth and final part has become too long. Therefore, I am dividing it into two parts (A and B). Before I begin Part 5A, here is a brief recap of what I covered in the previous four parts.

Part 1: Deagel.com predictions of the collapse of western societies and economies.
Part 2: Analysis of the Covid-19 fiasco and its impact on western societies and economies.
Part 3: A brief analysis of the Israel-Hamas war. The reactions and responses in western countries to the war.
Part 4: A brief history of conflict between Israel and Palestine. Explanation of past mistakes and how they have influenced the present circumstances in Israel and Palestine.

In Part 5A, I discuss what I believe will happen in the war between Israel and Hamas. I discuss several scenarios, which I support with evidence and some of my own deductions. I also discuss some of the current conspiracy theories. I discuss the motivations behind them as well as why I believe they are wrong.

In Part 5B, I discuss the broader impact of the possible events in the Middle East on the rest of the world. I mostly focus on western countries. I end with a quick reflection on the deagel.com predictions discussed in Part 1.

How will the war between Israel and Hamas end?

There are many different scenarios. The war might be contained to just Hamas (Gaza and even the West Bank) and Israel. It might expand to include various other terrorist and militant organisations; the Houthis and Hezbollah are already partly involved. The war could expand to include the broader Middle East. For example, Turkey, Iran, or Afghanistan (Taliban). The war could expand to a global conflict (World War 3).

Hamas attacked on 7th October to obtain a strong response from Israel. Ideally, they wanted a very strong response. They wanted Israel to inflict the highest death count possible on Gazan civilians. The intent is to villainise Israel as much as possible. This was to incite a response from other Arab Muslim countries.

Hamas have used civilian infrastructure as bases for military operations. They have also restricted the movement of Gazan civilians so that they cannot escape dangerous areas (discussed in Part 3). However, Israel has not responded as aggressively or as recklessly as Hamas might have hoped. Despite Hamas’ tactics regarding their use of civilians as human shields, the Israeli military is claiming only two civilians die for each Hamas fighter/terrorist killed (CNN). Hence, Hamas has needed to resort to various stunts such as AI photographs, images from other wars, and crisis actors (also discussed in Part 3).

Western media have treated most of the Hamas propaganda and reported figures as facts and have assigned blame to Israel. The United Nations has taken the position that Israel is causing a humanitarian catastrophe (Aljazeera). Their response has been referred to as collective punishment (United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner) and is ‘disproportionate’ (UPI). This argument is based on the high number of reported civilian casualties.

Regarding collective punishment, we could argue that the United Nations has a long history of imposing sanctions on Third-World countries. These sanctions mostly serve to harm civilian populations, leaving the leaders almost unaffected; see the Security Council list of sanctioned countries for a better idea.

Regarding proportionality, adhering to these seemingly arbitrary standards will result in more lives lost on both sides as the war is prolonged. It also encourages terrorist groups such as Hamas to endanger more civilians, as doing so becomes a strategic advantage. If the United Nations really cares about saving lives, they might consider a resolution about organising a refugee camp for Gazans in Egypt or any other Middle Eastern country that claims to be concerned about the wellbeing and safety of Gazans.

Expanding the War

To this point, the war has been mostly between Hamas and the Israeli Defence Forces. However, this does not mean that Hamas’ attempts to involve other countries have failed. It is quite possible that these countries are waiting for an opportune time to become involved. This is likely to depend on a number of factors. These could include:

Israel’s level of international support; this would include levels of support from Governments, individual world leaders, and the United Nations.
The US’s continued support for Israel.
Their ability to obtain substantial support from within their own countries to intervene in the war.
Their perception of Israel’s military and political strength.
Their perception of Israel’s ability to sustain long-term military campaigns.
Their ability to cooperate and effectively attack Israel.
Their ability to justify attacking Israel as an act of defence of Palestine.

Just Hamas

If the war remains contained to just Israel, Hamas, and the West Bank, Israel will win. They have a far superior military, which is backed by a much stronger economy. The more important questions are:

How long will it take?
What will be the cost in both money and lives?

Hamas still holds over 100 of the 240 hostages taken on 7th October. How many of them can Israel bring back safely? So far, Israel has had limited success in retrieving hostages. They managed to get back over 100 hostages during a one-week pause in fighting, but this was in exchange for two to three times as many Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisons (NBC News and discussed in detail in Part 3).

Israel’s ground operation appears to be progressing well in terms of captured and killed Hamas fighters/terrorists (New York Post). They are also having some success in fighting Hamas in the elaborate complex web of tunnels beneath Gaza (Times of Israel).

The ideology behind Hamas cannot be easily defeated. It is most likely embedded in the next generation of Gazan Palestinians. Hence, the two-state solution is no longer plausible. Israel and its neighbours will need to find workable alternative solutions.

Hezbollah

The inclusion of other terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, Houthis, Al-Qaeda, or any of the others could significantly extend the war. Hezbollah is a far more formidable enemy than Hamas. They have far superior weapons. Their fanaticism makes them very motivated fighters (The Tower). Attacking and killing civilians has been a consistent part of their strategy (Human Rights Watch).

The involvement of these groups, Hezbollah in particular, puts Israeli civilians at great risk. They could resort to hostage taking, given that this has been Hamas’ most effective move so far. However, their involvement is extremely unlikely to change the outcome of the war. Hezbollah is a familiar enemy to Israel, and they are aware of the threat they pose (The Tower). Despite the strength of Hezbollah and other groups that might join in, Israel’s military strength is still far superior. In the long run, a definitive confrontation with these groups could be favourable to Israel as it eliminates future threats from them.

Wider Multi-Country War

If multiple states and other actors become involved directly or indirectly in the war, the outcome becomes a little harder to predict. There is also the possibility that this could lead to a global war (World War 3). I believe there is a high chance this will expand to more countries, but I feel it is unlikely to lead to World War 3.

Earlier, I discussed seven possible factors that might influence countries joining the war. Countries are more likely to attack if they believe Israel is weak, and they will face limited ramifications for doing so.

Israel is lacking international support through the United Nations. On 12th December, the United Nations General Assembly voted 153 to 10 with 23 abstentions in favour of an immediate humanitarian ceasefire (CNN). On 8th December, the United Nations Security Council voted 13 to 1 with 1 abstention in favour of an immediate humanitarian ceasefire (UN News). Countries could argue that they need to intervene to force Israel to halt military action.

Israel’s economy is performing relatively well. Annual GDP growth is above 3%, Government Debt to GDP ratio has been reduced to 60%, approximately at pre-Covid-19 levels. Inflation is barely above 3% (Trading Economics). Economically, Israel has outperformed the US and any of the EU countries (Trading Economics). Unlike the US, UK, and EU countries, Israel does not appear to have a health crisis.

The continued condemnation from the United Nations could lead to sanctions. Sanctions could disrupt Israel’s economy and may affect Israel’s ability to fight a prolonged war. Israel is highly dependent on imports of grain (USDA). It imports wheat from Switzerland, Russia, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, and Romania. It imports corn from Switzerland, Russia, Romania, and the USA (OEC). Despite this dependence, Israel ranks 24th in the world in terms of food security. This far exceeds any of the countries that might attack them (Impact Economist).

Israel produces most of its own weapons (Strategic Analysis). It is unclear if it has any dependency on imported inputs to produce them.

Israel imports a high percentage of crude oil from Azerbaijan (OEC). This supply is likely to be targeted through sanctions. Israel is progressing towards improved energy security with the discovery of massive natural gas deposits in the Eastern Mediterranean (Middle East Policy Council). Overall, Israel appears reasonably self-sufficient.

Countries most opposed to Israel appear to have strong public support for intervening. For example, on Turkey’s centenary (28th October), hundreds of thousands of Turks attended in support of Palestine and Hamas (Reuters). Strong public support is essential to sustaining a military campaign. Loss of public support can lead to civil unrest and a rapid fall in military morale.

The perception of Israel’s military and political strength could be falling. The initial attack on 7th October could be seen as a catastrophic failure in intelligence and defence. The current lack of success in finding and rescuing the hostages could be seen as a sign of weakness. This is compounded by the accidental killing of three hostages (CBS News). This could be perceived as incompetence or panic. The one hostage to three prisoner deal could also be perceived as political weakness and a sign of caving to international pressure.

Tensions between the Muslim countries in the Middle East have been consistently high (often between Sunni and Shia Muslims). They often engage in proxy wars with each other. In 2023, tensions deescalated. Saudi Arabia and Iran have restored diplomatic ties (United States Institute of Peace). This has implications for both Syria and Yemen.

Leaders of both Iran and Turkey have come out in strong defence of Hamas and in condemnation of Israel (Al Monitor). Turkey’s President Erdogan considers Jerusalem an important city and has suggested that Turkey has a claim to it (Times of Israel). Iran’s leaders have often spouted hatred towards Israel (The Atlantic) and have funded terrorist groups to act against Israel.

It is possible that Turkey and Iran could form an alliance to intervene in the war. This could extend to include Syria and Lebanon. Qatar has strong connections with Hamas and might also join such an alliance (France 24). The Taliban are another potential threat.

The attacking countries would attempt to avoid international condemnation by claiming their attack is based on protecting Palestinians and preserving a two-state solution.

UK and US Support

The UK and US Governments have shown strong support for Israel. However, support is flailing as pressure from within these countries and from external international organisations such as the United Nations grows.

Both the UK and the US have leaders and Governments that could be on the way out soon. UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is very unpopular, as is his Conservative Party. They could be replaced next year by a Labour Party that would be far less willing to support Israel.

US support is far more significant than UK support. They have a far stronger military and a far greater presence in the Middle East. If the US pulls support for Israel, the UK is likely to follow. US President Joe Biden faces election in 2024. Given his current health, he is unlikely to run. He may not even finish his first term in office. A president who is less supportive of Israel could replace him. For example, Michelle Obama (Daily Wire), who has consistently polled favourable among Democrat voters (YouGov).

If a Republican candidate such as Donald Trump wins the next US Presidential Election, support for Israel is very likely to remain strong, regardless of public opinion. However, there is no guarantee that these elections will be free or unbiased. It is possible that Donald Trump will not even be allowed to run. The State of Colorado has disqualified Trump from running for President in their state (CBS).

We could argue that the Democrats are compelled to support Israel. According to the Jerusalem Post, the Democratic Party receives half of its donations from US Jews. Of the 535 house members and senators of the 2023-2025 Congress, 37 are Jewish. Of those 37, 34 are Democrats (over 90%) (Jewish Virtual Library).

The majority of US Jews vote for Democratic candidates over Republican candidates. According to a 2020 Pew Research poll, 71% of US Jews identify with or lean towards the Democratic Party. According to Presidential Election results dating back to 1968, on average, 71% of US Jews voted for the Democratic Party candidate and only 26% voted for the Republican Party candidate (Jewish Virtual Library). US Jews have shown long-term, consistent support for the Democratic Party. This is despite the Democratic Party embracing and actively supporting woke culture.

As discussed in Part 3, woke culture is fuelling the pro-Hamas and anti-Israel protests and marches around the western world. They do this directly through participation and indirectly by supporting and encouraging mass migration (discussed in Part 5B), Woke culture is not new but it has gained significant prominence with the rise of Black Lives Matter.

Self-proclaimed liberal western media constantly support woke ideology. Hollywood has mostly embraced wokeism. The majority of movies and television series have at least several woke references (e.g. climate change, racism towards minorities, transgender, and villainising of ‘white’ male characters). The media and entertainment industry has a relatively high percentage of US Jews in high positions (Wikipedia). Six media companies (Comcast, Disney, Time Warner, News Corp, National Amusements, and Sony) control approximately 90% of the US media (Tech Startups). Three of the six CEOs (Bob Iger, Brian L. Roberts, and Sumner Redstone) of these mega-companies are Jewish, and one (Jeff Bewkes) has married into a Jewish family (various sources). Many of the executives of the subsidiary companies are US Jews.

The US Jewish domination of Hollywood is a fact. It did not happen through conspiracy. It happened through capitalism. The studios founded by Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe were more successful than their competitors were. Success equates to growth. This led to more Jews entering the industry. The entertainment industry has become intertwined with US Jewish culture (Rolling Stone).

It is ironic that US Jews are drawn to the Democrats, wokeism, and socialist ideology. However, there might be some logic to it. Advocates of ‘socialist’ ideology typically target minorities, who often feel left behind or unfairly treated. They will claim that the privileged should compensate the less privileged. In reality, they are actually advocating that the successful should share their accomplishments with the unsuccessful.

US Jews might feel some solidarity with the minorities who are swayed by socialist values based on their own history of persecution. US Jews are also a minority in the US, making up just 2% of the population.

Democrats like to promote themselves as liberal. Liberalism is attractive to US Jews. However, Democrats are not liberal. Socialism is not liberal, nor is their more genuine belief in crony capitalism. Free-market capitalism aligns with liberalism. It requires innovation and creativity.

Recent events have clearly revealed that the woke do not consider Jews a minority group. They consider them ‘white’ and part of the majority. They do not regard them as victims but instead consider them oppressors.

The woke are incredibly racist on many levels. To equate a vast number of different ethnicities to a colour is incredibly disrespectful. To be accepted by the woke, ‘white’ people need to be self-loathing. They need to accept that all their achievements stem from privilege.

On the opposite end of the scale is the designation of ‘black’. If the woke perceive someone as black, they are also perceived to be disadvantaged because of racism or systemic racism. Promoting universal victimhood for people based on the darkness of their skin creates a culture where failure is acceptable. People feel they do not need to be held accountable for their own lack of success. This is incredibly unempowering. This leads to further inequality in a capitalist system. Therefore, socialist ideology becomes the default solution.

Are the Democrats compelled to support Israel? Probably not. The number of votes lost from Jewish voters is likely to be low. They make up a small percentage of the overall voters. According to a poll conducted in 2020, Jewish Democrats have mixed feelings regarding their closeness to Israel. This might be more closely linked to the woke labelling Benjamin Netanyahu as far-right. See Figure 1 for responses to this poll.

Figure 1: Democrat and Republican Leaning Us Jews Responses to Various Questions

Sources: Pew Research

US Jews continued support for the Democrats might depend on what they value more. Israel, Judaism, and their culture, or wokeism. Sadly, many might choose the latter.

Keeping major donors happy might be a much bigger concern. Considering this is a relatively small group, the Democratic Party would already know how they would respond.

Does Israel Really Need the US?

How important is US support for Israel? Their presence in the Mediterranean is a deterrent to Turkey. If Turkey were unwilling to attack Israel, Iran would also be less willing to attack, as they would be considerably weaker on their own.

US support may also be a hindrance. They might try to dictate how Israel fights this war. The US has a terrible track record in the Middle East. Campaigns in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan have gone badly. US input could actually weaken Israel if it results in bad decisions.

Who Will Win?

How is this all going to end?. According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, Iran and Turkey have active militaries of 610,000 and 355,200 personnel, respectively. Turkey also has an additional 156,800 paramilitary personnel. Based on the same source, Israel has an active military of 169,500 and another 465,000 reserves. Deagel.com ranks both Iran’s and Turkey’s military strength in the top ten in the world, 7th and 10th, respectively (deagel.com).

If Israel loses this war, it could be completely catastrophic. The high cost of defeat could provide pivotal motivation to win. The intervening countries will not have that motivation because far less is at stake for them.

Conspiracy Hypotheses (Layman definition, not technical)

Many ‘conspiracy theorists’ are highly critical of Israel and Zionists. For many, this stems from the belief that Israel and Jews control the world. As discussed earlier, US Jews have considerable influence in media and entertainment. This gives them greater visibility and the illusion that they have more overall influence in the Establishment than non-Jews, who are less visible in the industries they dominate.

There are also myths that Jews control the banks. This is based more on stereotypes than evidence. Jews, by default, are connected to Israel. Therefore, some ‘conspiracy theorists’ conclude that Israel controls the world through the Jews in the media and possibly banking.

The reverse is far more likely. The US considers Israel an asset in the Middle East. It enables the US to monitor and influence the region (Jerusalem Post). The instability caused by Palestine acts as an excuse to remain involved in the region. The two-state solution is of greater benefit to the US than it is to Israel. Russia and China’s increasing influence in the region should maintain the value of Israel as an ally.

The woke culture of victimhood has further hurt the reputation of Jews with ‘conspiracy theorists’. Anti-Semitism, like islamophobia, transphobia, homophobia, and racism, is weaponised to block criticism and censor people with different opinions. For example, some would consider my argument about the influence of US Jews in the media and entertainment industry anti-Semitic. They would also argue that stating that African-American and African-Caribbean athletes have a genetic advantage when it comes to sprinting and a genetic disadvantage when it comes to swimming is racist (Forbes). However, nobody questions the number of US Presidents of Irish descent (approximately half of all US Presidents) and seven of the last eight US Presidents (Wikipedia).

7th October Conspiracies

There are many conspiracy hypotheses regarding the 7th October attacks and the motives behind them. The magnitude and duration of the Hamas attack is shocking considering the extent of Israeli intelligence and presumed preparedness for attacks from Hamas. Israel’s preparedness would be expected to be higher considering it was the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, which was also a surprise attack on Israel (Wikipedia).

According to several sources, Egyptian intelligence warned Israeli intelligence about the attack several days before it occurred (New York Post and NDTV World). There was also a document code named ‘Jericho Wall’. This 40-page document contained a detailed plan for a potential attack on Israel. The plan did not include timeframes and has been described as aspirational rather than realistic (Jerusalem Post). If we assume these sources are correct, Israeli intelligence chose to ignore the warnings, or they were told by another source they were false.

The attendees of the Supernova Music Festival were not informed of its location until hours before it began (The Guardian). This was most likely because the location had been changed just two days prior (Billboard). Considering the extent of preparedness for the Hamas attack, it appears likely they had some prior knowledge of the location of the musical festival. More than half of the hostages they took were from the music festival (Billboard).

There are also reports of an IDF helicopter at the Nova Festival. According to Haaretz, this helicopter may have hit some of the attendees of the festival while attacking the Hamas terrorists. ‘Conspiracy theorists’ have jumped on this information as proof the IDF was targeting their own civilians. Additional video footage was posted on social media. There are many other reports stating that the helicopter footage is from 9th October (Full Fact).

From the evidence, I think we can strongly speculate that Hamas had some help pulling off the attacks. Many are speculating this was a false flag event enabled by the Israeli Government (The Last American Vagabond). Sadly, false flag events are common practice in the world. ‘Conspiracy theorists’ have exposed many of them. In the case of Israel, ‘conspiracy theorists’ argue the Israeli Government would use these attacks as justification to take over the Gaza Strip. Reasons given include:

Distract from the country’s domestic problems and save the existing Government. In 2023, Israel experienced some social unrest (CNN) and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s approval ratings had fluctuated over certain issues and decisions (Reuters).
Access to large oil and gas reserves off the coast of Gaza (Planet Critical).
Enable Israel to go ahead with the Ben Gurion Canal Project (Turkiye).
Eliminate an annoying enemy.

I would argue that this line of reasoning is too simplistic. The atrocities committed on 7th October do not help the Israeli Government’s approval ratings. They have fallen far further, as many Israelis consider that Benjamin Netanyahu is at least partially responsible for what happened (Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel).

Oil and gas reserves and a potential canal project would not only benefit Israel but any occupier of that land. The relative benefits from these projects are likely overstated in comparison to what is at stake in war.

Hamas and the Gazan Palestinians are a problem for the Israeli Government. However, there are other ways, and there have been other opportunities to deal with them. This could have been done in a manner that would not have provoked outrage across the world (e.g. use of bad batches of the Covid-19 jabs or the contamination of the water and/or air to cause disease or infertility).

The Abraham Accords had reached a crucial point in achieving peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia and essentially most of the Middle East (Reuters). The 7th October attack puts all of this in great jeopardy. It is difficult to imagine that putting these deals at risk would be of any advantage to the Israeli Government.

Another indication that 7th October was not a false flag or just simply allowed to happen is the openness of Israeli officials regarding the mistakes that have been made. They were honest about the accidental killing of hostages by the IDF. They were honest about the number of deaths on 7th October by revising the number down from 1,400 to 1,200.

The Prime Minister’s Senior Advisor, Mark Regev, has been interviewed dozens of times by various western media. He does not use political spin. He answers questions directly. For questions he cannot answer, he offers reasons why that is currently the case. In an interview with CNN, he openly admitted mistakes made by Israel intelligence in regards to security and the information they had prior to 7th October. Most western leaders and officials would have denied any knowledge or wrongdoing on their part. Ironically, much of the criticism Israel has received has been a product of its own honesty.

The events of 7th October are mostly a trigger for something far bigger than just a land grab of Gaza. Israel was put in a position where they were forced to respond. It should be obvious to all parties that any response deemed too aggressive would trigger a strong backlash from Israel’s neighbours.

In reality, it has been much worse. The backlash has been around the world. It has been fuelled by propaganda. This is evident from the responses of many countries as well as the many protests around the world. I believe the first intention of those behind the attacks on 7th October was the destruction of Israel. The second intention is the destruction of the western world. It is possible that things could become so bad so quickly that the Deagel predictions could prove to be close to accurate (See Part One).

I have several collections of posts. I have organised these collections based on content and purpose.

The first collection contains six collection posts created before PeakD had the collection feature. Four of these posts relate to the core of my content; one of them contains all my Actifit Posts, and one of them contains my video course, ‘Economics is Everyone’.

The second collection consists of the posts that I consider define my channel. These posts are significant in terms of content as well as how they contribute to the growth of the channel. These posts reveal the most about what I believe in.

The third and fourth collection is what I call my ‘Freedom-based Economics living book’. They contain all the posts that support my ideas about the value and power of freedom. Some of these posts explain what we can achieve with freedom and what we need to utilise it. Some of them explain how we are deprived of freedom and how we often give up freedom for security and comfort. The third collection concludes with possible scenarios depending on what we (society) choose to do.