Home   |   Sample Newsletter   |    Track Record   |   Order   |    Subscriber Login

Maybury

Chaostan
or
Chaosistan?

By Richard J. Maybury

"For at least 15 years, I've heard rumors that EWR is circulated under the table in the Pentagon, so those rumors have turned out true. Also, it looks like EWR and my concept of Chaostan is what caused the fracture in the foreign policy establishment."
Richard Maybury


From the November/December 2009 EWR

I doubt we are facing the end of America, but I’m almost certain we are at the end of the US empire.  The global rebellion is gathering steam.

Has Newsweek caught the CIA and Pentagon copying my Chaostan analysis?

On October 1, 2009 the former commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal, gave a speech about “Chaosistan.”  He expressed doubts about the strategy in Afghanistan, and was called on the carpet of Air Force One in Denmark, which was reminiscent of Truman’s upbraiding of MacArthur.  Ever since, the Pentagon, CIA and the rest of the foreign policy establishment have been split, pro vs. con regarding McChrystal’s Chaosistan message. 

chaostan

Newsweek says that when journalists asked McChrystal’s entourage where he got the Chaosistan idea, they were told it was from my 1998 speech at the New Orleans Investment Conference titled “What is Chaostan?”

The Newsweek story, “Chaosistan,” is in the      October 19, 2009 issue, and on Newsweek’s website. 

Newsweek even drew attention to my 1998 Chaostan investment suggestions (which have paid off spectacularly).

For at least 15 years, I’ve heard rumors that EWR is circulated under the table in the Pentagon, so those rumors have turned out true.  Also, it looks like EWR and my concept of Chaostan is what caused the fracture in the foreign policy establishment.  However…

…it’s unimaginable to me…

…that the fracture will bring a withdrawal from Chaostan.  I think Washington has too much pride invested there.  A London Financial Times editorial about Afghanistan observes, “Washington’s military mission now appears to have no goal beyond the avoidance of defeat.  Asked to define victory, the US special envoy, Richard Holbrooke, could only say, ‘We’ll know it when we see it.’”1

Also, to us the war is a problem, but to the New Axis it’s a solution; they aren’t likely to let it go away.  If Washington tries to withdraw, they will hit us again to lure Washington back in.

A recommitment to the rapidly worsening war in Chaostan means you and I are back to trying to figure out how this deepening of the quagmire will change flows of money.  We can either profit from the war, or lose; breaking even isn’t an option, no one knows how to do it.

I think the long-run outlook for defense stocks is very bright.2  Much of the wealth taken from you to pay for the war will go into Lockheed (LMT), General Dynamics (GD), Raytheon (RTN) and Northrop Grumman (NOC).  To get some of your money back, purchase these stocks.

What the Pentagon buys depends not on need or quality of the weapons but on how many congressmen the manufacturer owns.  The four giants own the most.3

ordernow

1 "How the west can exit…," FIN. TIMES, 5 Oct 09.

2 If you are concerned about the ethics of owning defense stocks, read the article titled Ethics of Weapons Stocks. This reveals a lot about the ethics of the alternatives that appear on the surface to be squeaky clean. The whole financial world is a snake-infested political swamp, and the choice is only between one type of snake and another.

3 Actually it's five, but I'm still nervous about Boeing. It has a lot of exposure to the civilian airline industry.