[Cicero]

Stratfor is a group of very intelligent outsiders. It has the advantage that they think outside the box. They probably don't work with inside information or tips from the security agencies.

They have been pretty good, except in the case of the Afghan campaign, which they got completely and utterly wrong.

This analysis seems sensible to me on the whole. It's what Freepers have already been saying. EXCEPT, as already pointed out, that North Korea is probably miscalculating and going too far, as STRATFOR recognizes that France has, and there will probably be at least a strike to take out their nuclear reactors.

China is the great enigma. This will weaken them in some ways, because they were hoping to control events in central Asia through their ally, Pakistan. They were hoping to expand westward as well as into Formosa. Instead, the U.S. is moving into that region. It looks as if we will wind up holding TWO centers of control: in the Middle East oil region and in the Central Asian "great game" region. We are more likely to firm up in alliance with Russia than with China. China poses the greatest potential threat to our future, after militant Islam.

[RightWhale]

Stratfor seems to be like any thinktank: they throw everything they know into a box and shake it up. The results are pretty much random. Much like DEBKA. Groupthink.

Rather than relying on their interpretations, just look at their data. Any single person can do as well as or better than a committee when it comes to predictions.