JW Insider

Well one reason would be the scrripture at Dan. 10:20-21 (You quoted partially.) The angel speaking here mentions the princes of Persia and Greece in the same breath as Michael "your prince". (the prince mentioned at Dan. 12:1). The context itself indicates to me that these "princes" are all spirit creatures and the angel speaking these words provides an insight on what is going on "behind the scenes" as it were.  Isn't that reasonable? 

Who would want to resist and hold up an angel who was sent BY GOD on an urgent mission to an old man in need but a desperately wicked and strong spirit person?

*** dp chap. 12 pp. 204-205 Strengthened by a Messenger From God ***
[Box on page 204, 205]
Angelic Guardians or Demonic Rulers?
  WE CAN learn much from what the book of Daniel says about the angels. It tells us about the role they play in carrying out Jehovah’s word and the effort they put forth to fulfill their assignments.
  God’s angel said that on his way to speak to Daniel, he was hindered by “the prince of the royal realm of Persia.” After contending with him for 21 days, the angelic messenger was able to proceed only with the help of “Michael, one of the foremost princes.” The angel also said that he would again have to fight that enemy and possibly “the prince of Greece.” (Daniel 10:13, 20) No easy task, even for an angel! Who, though, were these princes of Persia and Greece?
  First of all, we note that Michael was called “one of the foremost princes” and “the prince of you people.” Later, Michael was referred to as “the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people.” (Daniel 10:21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel assigned by Jehovah to lead the Israelites through the wilderness.—Exodus 23:20-23; 32:34; 33:2.
  Lending support to this conclusion is the disciple Jude’s statement that “Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body.” (Jude 9) Michael’s position, power, and authority made him truly “the archangel,” meaning “the chief angel,” or “the principal angel.” Most fittingly, this lofty position can be applied to none other than Jesus Christ, the Son of God, before and after his life on earth.—1 Thessalonians 4:16; Revelation 12:7-9.
  Does this mean that Jehovah also appointed angels over such nations as Persia and Greece to guide them in their affairs? Well, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, openly stated: “The ruler of the world . . . has no hold on me.” Jesus also said: “My kingdom is no part of this world . . . my kingdom is not from this source.” (John 14:30; 18:36) The apostle John declared that “the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” (1 John 5:19) It is clear that the nations of the world never were and are not now under the guidance or rulership of God or Christ. While Jehovah permits “the superior authorities” to exist and maintain control of earthly governmental affairs, he does not appoint his angels over them. (Romans 13:1-7) Any “princes” or “rulers” over them could be placed there only by “the ruler of the world,” Satan the Devil. They would have to be demonic rulers rather than angelic guardians. There are, then, invisible demonic forces, or “princes,” behind the visible rulers, and national conflicts involve more than mere humans.
=====
Also we are certain the world powers get their power from Satan the ruler of the demons. Read Rev 13:1,2
(Revelation 13:1, 2) And it stood still on the sand of the sea. And I saw a wild beast ascending out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, and on its horns ten diadems, but on its heads blasphemous names. 2 Now the wild beast that I saw was like a leopard, but its feet were like those of a bear, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth. And the dragon gave to the beast its power and its throne and great authority.
Light and darkness do not cooperate together.
 
Italics, mine.

Demons having remorse? You are greatly mistaken.  They are willful in what they do, just like Satan.  They are stored up for destruction for many centuries.  Read the books of Genesis, Jude, and Revelation.  However they may sometimes appear to be doing good things.  They have many strategies to fool people:
(2 Thessalonians 2:9-12) 9 But the lawless one’s presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents 10 and with every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth that they might be saved. 11 So that is why God lets an operation of error go to them, that they may get to believing the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.
(2 Peter 2:4) 4 Certainly God did not refrain from punishing the angels who sinned, but threw them into Tarʹta·rus, putting them in chains of dense darkness to be reserved for judgment. 
 
We are presently doing the Bible Reading in the Gospels. What did Jesus do when the demons sought to help by identifying Jesus as the Son of God (they know him of course - they used to be in heaven together at one time).  He always rebuked them and did not accept help from them.   The apostles did the same.
(Mark 5:2-13) . . .And immediately after Jesus got out of the boat, a man under the power of an unclean spirit met him from among the tombs. 3 His haunt was among the tombs, and up to that time, absolutely no one was able to bind him securely, even with a chain. 4 He had often been bound with fetters and chains, but he snapped the chains apart and smashed the fetters; and nobody had the strength to subdue him. 5 And continually, night and day, he was crying out in the tombs and in the mountains and slashing himself with stones. 6 But on catching sight of Jesus from a distance, he ran and bowed down to him. 7 Then he cried out with a loud voice: “What have I to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I put you under oath by God not to torment me.” 8 For Jesus had been saying to it: “Come out of the man, you unclean spirit.” 9 But Jesus asked him: “What is your name?” And he replied: “My name is Legion, because there are many of us.” 10 And he kept pleading with Jesus not to send the spirits out of the country. 11 Now a great herd of swine was feeding there at the mountain. 12 So the spirits pleaded with him: “Send us into the swine, so that we may enter into them.” 13 And he gave them permission. With that the unclean spirits came out and went into the swine, and the herd rushed over the precipice into the sea, about 2,000 of them, and were drowned in the sea. 

(Acts 16:16-18) 16 And it happened that as we were going to the place of prayer, a certain servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination, met us. She used to furnish her masters with much gain by practicing the art of prediction. 17 This [girl] kept following Paul and us and crying out with the words: “These men are slaves of the Most High God, who are publishing to YOU the way of salvation.” 18 This she kept doing for many days. Finally Paul got tired of it and turned and said to the spirit: “I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

(Deuteronomy 18:10-12) There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, anyone practicing magic, anyone who looks for omens, a sorcerer, 11 anyone binding others with a spell, anyone who consults a spirit medium or a fortune-teller, or anyone who inquires of the dead. 12 For whoever does these things is detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable practices Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you.
 
A word to the wise.
 

I referenced the idea of solving a mystery because the Revelation book includes this event under the heading (Chapter 34): "AN AWESOME MYSTERY SOLVED."
I listened to Knorr's talk recorded in Cleveland, found here (https://archive.org/details/PeaceCanItLastByNathanKnorr)while following along in the "Peace -- Can it Last?" booklet which says inside the booklet that it is a transcript of the talk. It is not actually a transcript, although it's possible that it was intended as one. The booklet states:
The above is the text of the speech "Peace — Can It Last?" delivered by the president of the WATCH TOWER SOCIETY, Sunday, September 20, 1942, at the public meeting of the New World Theocratic Assembly. This unique Assembly included more than eighty simultaneous conventions in cities in America, British Isles, Sweden, Central and South America, West and South Africa, and Hawaii. The president spoke at the key convention in Cleveland, Ohio, and his speech was conducted by a network of telephone lines direct to like conventions in fifty-one other cities in the United States, besides being radio-east over WBBR. The combined attendance in the United States at the lecture was 126,000. The speech is here published in behalf of the millions of persons of good-will who did not hear. But the transcript contains many items of interest that were either skipped by Knorr, or were not part of the original transcript he read from. I'll mark in red the portions that were skipped in the speech.
 
But the war precedes a peace; and in a radio address at Philadelphia, broadcast around the world, concerning postwar leadership, the attorney general of the United States said (July 3, 1942): "It seems to me a wholesome thing that men are thinking in 1942 of ways to win a peace, and acting on their thoughts — yes, even now, while the war is yet to be won. It means that at last the realization has come to us that world war and world peace cannot be dissociated as parts of the same great upheaval. The problems of peace and of war are interdependent." (New York Times, July 4, 1942) Shortly thereafter the ex-president of the nation said in a broadcast from San Francisco: "Whatever the modifying views of our associates in war may be, Americans should have formulated the kind of peace that THEY want. They must make up their minds BEFORE the war ends; otherwise others will make the peace, and not us." (New York Times, July 13, 1942) And in his recent book, on "The Problems of Lasting Peace", it is written: "The purpose of this war, the most terrible of three centuries, is to make a lasting Peace. We must first win the war. But we will not win lasting peace unless we prepare for it. And we can prepare only by full and free public discussion, by the cold surgery of analysis." In May it was revealed that thirty-five government agencies were then engaged in postwar planning. (Stated by T. E. D., May 9, 1942) International discussions, and likewise public forums, are being held on postwar problems. Therefore the question is a timely and urgent one, "Peace — Can It Last?" The answer depends upon how the peace problems are solved. The greatest religious head in "Christendom" claims it his right to hold the world domination, and he is moving to exercise his power and influence in the peace conference, even offering the Vatican in which to hold it. By reason of his concordat with the Fascist dictator of Rome in 1929 he is now a temporal ruler as well as a religious one. The Hierarchy and the religious population which he rules as god declare that the Peace Treaty of 1919 failed because the pope was not in on it. He now appears in a peace role, pluming himself for a suitable place or voice in the coming Peace Conference. If he gains it, and if the Treaty of Vienna of 1815 is followed as to primacy of diplomatic representatives, then he or his official representative should preside as the "dean" of all the conferees. Says one of his American archbishops: "The only enduring peace that will restore the world to sanity and to a sense of the dignity of human personality is the peace of Pope Pius XII." And a monsignor in a radiocast from Washington, D.C., says: "He [that is, Pacelli] whose name is rooted in peace will be the one who will restore peace to the world; for when peace does come it will come, not in the way the world expects or plans it, but in an utterly unsuspected way." — Mgr. F. J. S., February 8, 1942. A United Press dispatch of July 15, from Vichy, France, was therefore of peculiar interest to Americans who believe only in peace by victory, and no negotiated peace with a gangster, and which dispatch reads: "Diplomatic circles said tonight that the Vatican was preparing a peace encyclical, to be published in mid-August, defining Pope Pius XII's ideas of a basis for a negotiated peace and postwar world planning." "An earlier United Press dispatch from Vichy, which apparently had some bearing on this report, was completely censored out except for the statement that 'there was a noticeable rapprochement of the Vatican and non-Catholic powers' recently." (New York Times, July 16,1942) Whom these "non-Catholic powers" include can be surmised, when this fact is remembered, that despite the break between Italy and the United States the secretary of the personal envoy of the president is meantime acting as the representative of this country to the Vatican. The political statesmen of the world are also looking ahead to the peace, anxiously. Some fear the peace worse than they do the war, fearing for a great postwar slump, unemployment, dislocation of industry, communications' breakdown, international debt tangle, anarchy and revolutions in various places, famine and pestilence, and other evils. They hope that the mistakes and blunders of 1919 and following years will not be repeated. A great struggle is foreseen to "lift the living standards from one end of this planet to the other". The Nazi dictator has led his hordes on in world aggression Math the promise of, to quote him, "a social state which must and shall be a model of perfection in every sphere of life"; and the pope has published to the world a five-point program for world peace. Those of a democratic mind hope for a United States of the world, a "family of nations", a "world association" based on the United Nations, including a "world legion". Says one spokesman: "An international constitution and government will be a postwar necessity." Others argue for a "World Bill of Rights". Others say the evidence shows that the hopes of the world are for the League of Nations again; and one college official says that the World Court for international arbitration must be made the key in a revived League. One of the president's own cabinet members says: 'A world organization, with the United Nations as its base, will determine the peace, and the postwar world will be policed by the allied powers.'  Those rulers and representatives of the people charged with the task of arranging the postwar conditions have a tremendous responsibility, not only before the people, but also before the great Universal Ruler, Jehovah God. One thing to notice, too, is that this is the part of the speech about the victor in the war. Yet, the speech itself doesn't really  come close to mentioning who will be the victor of the war. It even apparently chides the United States for thinking that a peace can only come if the Allied Powers are the victor. And he chides the harlot, Babylon the Great, whose capital is in Vatican City for being ready to ride on the back of whomever shows himself as victor. But it might not have been noticed that Knorr was merely reading various quotes about how various leaders planned to be involved in a post-war peace. Rightly, Knorr never took sides in this -- even in another spot when he mentioned the king of the north and king of the south, he didn't predict which side would come out on top.
More importantly, when Knorr uses the expression "based on the United Nations" he is referring to an existing entity, not one that only appears first in planning stages in 1944 and then shows up for real in 1945. That's why he can quote a cabinet member in the next sentence who already refers to the United Nations as an existing entity when he says: "A world organization, with the United Nations as its base, will determine the peace, and the postwar world will be policed by the allied powers." Knorr did not predict that the allies would win; allied powers predicted (of course) that the allied powers would win. I think it's fair to say that Knorr probably thought the allied powers would win. But a "United Nations" of some kind would be the only hope of a more lasting peace no matter who won.
The United Nations was actually named by F.D.Roosevelt at the Arcadia Conference and adopted on January 1, 1942. It was already in the news, and it was obvious that the writer of this speech was well aware of these various proposals in the news. (The writer was not Knorr, apparently, as evidenced by the way Knorr reads and misreads several items which sometimes indicates a lack of understanding as to the intended meaning.) But Knorr does not commit to any particular one of these names or organizations as the particular one that would end up reviving an organization like the League of Nations after the war.

Sometimes, the Watchtower publications have pointed back to a time when the Watchtower predicted World War One (WWI) in 1914 and then also predicted that the United Nations would rise up to replace the League of Nations. These two "predictions" have even been paired together and presented nearly back-to-back in our publications. They were even brought up again at the 2014 convention and the 2009 convention. The reason the Watchtower has reviewed these two ideas from our history is probably already obvious and clear, and it has been clearly stated, too.
One of the most recent reviews of the history of Jehovah's Witnesses contains very similar claims, and is found in one of the videos, now also available on tv.jw.org: https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/VODOrgHistory/pub-ivfa2_x_VIDEO
These online transcripts appear fairly accurate:
Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 1 Out of Darkness.pdf Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 2 Let the Light Shine.pdf Here is the relevant part about 1914:
—Geoffrey W. Jackson—
They realized that 1914 had a significance, —Gerrit Lösch—
When World War I broke out in July, they felt vindicated and it strengthened their faith in the Bible, and in Jehovah’s prophetic Word. Also, it enhanced their trust that Jehovah was using Brother Russell and his friends to explain truth to others. —Anthony Morris III—
Just looking at the sign of the times that Jesus told us to look at is enough, but it's still significant that they could pinpoint that year. That's phenomenal. Here is the relevant part about the UN and League of Nations:
—Narrator—
. . . And soon, they would boldly proclaim a Bible prophecy that pointed to the outcome of that war. ——Chapter 4: "Taught By Jehovah"——
—Narrator—
The year was 1941. Having taken the lead for 25 momentous years, J. F. Rutherford had become seriously ill and was about to make his final public appearance. . . . The second World War was raging. Some felt that these events could lead directly into Armageddon. In spite of this, in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr—the one next appointed to take the lead among Jehovah's Witnesses—spoke at a convention about a Bible prophecy that indicated that significant events had to occur first. —Knorr (reenactment)—
This international war is not 'the battle of the great day of God Almighty.' Before Armageddon comes, the Scriptures show, a peace must come. —John Wischuk—
There was no peace on the horizon, and yet we said, "Peace—Can It Last?" —Narrator—
Knorr centered attention on Revelation 17:8, which indicates that a figurative wild beast would come into existence, would cease to exist, but then would come back to life. Knorr then drew his listeners' attention to the defunct League of Nations. —Knorr (reenactment)—
The League is in effect in a state of suspended animation and needs to be revived if it is ever to live again. It has gone into the abyss of inaction and ineffectiveness. It "is not." Will the League remain in the pit? Again the Word of God gives answer: The association of worldly nations will rise again. —Narrator—
That association did rise again three years later as the United Nations. —Anthony Morris III—
They didn't know it was going to be called the United Nations, and we don't make that claim. But they knew it was coming out.  
[Should be noted that Morris is claiming something that they "KNEW" in advance but he is also correcting a common claim that not only did Knorr predict the rise of the League of Nations three years ahead of time, but that he even used the term "United Nations." As one person writes on a website "Knorr prophesied in 1942 that the League of Nations would rise out of the abyss. Knorr used the expression 'United Nations.' How could he have known the exact name of the new incarnation, when it wasn't established until 1945?"]
Witnesses got these ideas about a correctly predicted prophecy from an article published a few years later under Knorr's administration in 1960. These quotes should be compared with the actual transcript of the speech Knorr made on September 20, 1942, which was made available as a booklet, and can be found here: http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/booklets/peace.html
The July 15, 1960 Watchtower, page 444, said this:
"In 1942 the “faithful and discreet slave” guided by Jehovah’s unerring spirit made known that the democracies would win World War II and that there would be a United Nations organization set up." You can also see a reference to the 1942 event in the Revelation book (p.248) on WOL at jw.org: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
You can also read the following about it in the April 15, 1989 Watchtower, p.14 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
By divine providence, Jehovah’s Witnesses received enlightenment on that mystery in 1942. . . . Nathan H. Knorr, president of the Watch Tower Society, gave the public talk, “Peace—Can It Last?” Therein he reviewed Revelation 17:8, . . . . Was that Bible-based forecast fulfilled? Truly it was! In 1945 the international “wild beast” emerged from its abyss of inactivity as the United Nations. See also the Kingdom Come book  kc chap. 17 pp. 162-173 and and interesting version of events found in a 1981 Watchtower about why this "insight" was given w81 12/15 pp. 28-30
The Proclaimers book states it like this on page 192-3 (  jv chap. 14 pp. 188-201 )
This time, it involved the United Nations, successor to the League. While World War II was still under way, in 1942, Jehovah’s Witnesses had already discerned from the Bible, at Revelation 17:8, that the world peace organization would rise again, also that it would fail to bring lasting peace. This was explained by N. H. Knorr, then president of the Watch Tower Society, in the convention discourse “Peace—Can It Last?” Boldly Jehovah’s Witnesses proclaimed that view of the developing world situation. In 1993 the idea was stated as follows:
“The Disgusting Thing” 12, 13. What was “the disgusting thing,” and—as foreseen by the faithful and discreet slave—when and how was it reestablished? 12 When the end of the second world war was in sight, there was another development. “They will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation.” (Daniel 11:31b) This “disgusting thing,” which Jesus also mentioned, had already been recognized as the League of Nations, the scarlet-colored wild beast that according to Revelation went into the abyss. (Matthew 24:15; Revelation 17:8; see Light, Book Two, page 94.) It did this when World War II broke out. However, at the New World Theocratic Assembly of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr, third president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, discussed the prophecy of Revelation 17 and warned that the beast would rise again from the abyss. 13 History bore out the truth of his words. Between August and October 1944, at Dumbarton Oaks in the United States, work was begun on the charter of what would be called the United Nations. The charter was adopted by 51 nations, including the former Soviet Union, and when it came into force on October 24, 1945, the defunct League of Nations in effect came out of the abyss. There are several more examples, but this should suffice. I am struck by how often the point is emphasized that these were Knorr's words, "his words" and that they were a Bible-based forecast "foreseen" and "discerned" and "known" in advance through "divine providence" and "enlightenment" and men being "guided by Jehovah's unerring spirit." This is an odd focus on the insights and discernment of men. These expressions are also dangerously presumptuous in that they are so often applied to the one or two times when it seems something was foreseen correctly, but there is no balanced way of discussing the reasons that literally dozens of predictions were made incorrectly and have been dropped as "old light."
But, as many Witnesses already know, there is something even deeper that is wrong with these claims of accuracy in discernment. The claims are inaccurate! It turns out that this was not really even predicted in advance. A close look at the original transcript of Knorr's talk actually solves the mystery of why he used the term United Nations in his speech. It's because he gave the speech AFTER official work on the United Nations had already begun.

I should add that it's very possible for the disciples in 33 CE to hear these words on their own without the context and understand them to say that wars, food shortages and earthquakes would be signs that the end would be nearly upon them. We can't be blamed for seeing them the way the Watchtower explains them, because the Watchtower has always relied on re-translations of the words in Matthew 24 which tend to remove the meaning in context. 
There is a good example of this mistranslation in the Matthew 24:8 above, where it supposedly says "All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress." The KJV is often followed as closely as possible by at least half of the modern English translations whenever the differences do not seem that important. So about half of the English translations are very similar to ours. But a little more than half, from a check of 40 translations, include a translation of the Greek particle "de" which the KJV and the NWT skips here. In other words we translate it as if it said:
πάντα ταῦτα ἀρχὴ ὠδίνων when it really says:
πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ἀρχὴ ὠδίνων Why is the word important? It changes the meaning from:
"All these things are a beginning of birth pains" to:
"But all these things are but a beginning of birth pains." In other words it emphasizes that something is missing or even wrong in the natural understanding of the previous statement about wars and earthquakes and famines. Here's why. All the Greek lexicons mention something like the following:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1161&t=KJV
δέ dé, deh; a primary particle (adversative or continuative) STRONGS NT 1161: δέ δέ (related to δή, as μέν to μήν, cf. Klotz ad Devar. ii. 2, p. 355), a particle adversative, distinctive, disjunctive 1. universally, by way of opposition and distinction; it is added to statements opposed to a preceding statement: ἐάν ὀφθαλμός κτλ. Matthew 6:23; ἐλεύσονται δέ ἡμέραι, Mark 2:20; it opposes persons to persons or things previously mentioned It's true that it isn't ALWAYS translated, but when the context repeatedly refers to the possibility of a misunderstanding then it is an important part of the meaning and must be translated. (Matthew 24 repeatedly and explicitly mentions the possibility of misunderstanding or being misled.)
This is why, when we bring in the meaning of context with the original Greek meaning of the words (including: parousia, synteleia, de, etc) we would have a meaning that more likely fits the following scenario:
Disciples: Please, can you tell us when this destruction of Jerusalem's Temple will occur? Can you tell us the sign that we should look for when we know that the final end and your final manifestation is about to happen?  Jesus responds: Look out that nobody misleads you. Many people will come around, even on the basis of my name, saying they represent me, yet they will mislead many. [You could easily be misled by the fact that] there will be wars, earthquakes and famines. Don't be tempted to raise the alarm based on such things, because these kinds of things will keep taking place [as they always have]. All these things are but a beginning of the birth pains, [not the end of all things that you are asking about]. The reason Jesus said this becomes clear in the rest of the chapter when he mentions the suddenness and unexpectedness of the end. It can't be predicted. It's as if two persons were going about their business grinding at a mill, and one was taken and one wasn't. It's the way it happens with most pregnancies, when the mother-to-be can be going about her business, and suddenly and unexpectedly a pain comes upon her. It's the way it happens with a bolt of bright lightning that suddenly happens. It's the way it happened in Noah's day when people didn't really believe or expect it to happen and suddenly the flood sweeps them away. It's the same way it happened in the days of Lot and Sodom when, without warning, fire came from heaven and destroyed them.

Discuss the question from the title of the topic? Now that's a novel idea. ?
It is a reasonable solution to see the 10-horns and the wild beast as either representing, or some part of the dominant world power at the time of the great tribulation, the fall of Babylon the Great, Armageddon, etc. And it is a reasonable assumption to see the prostitute as false religion. And it seems that God puts a thought into the heart of the ten horns and the heart of the wild beast to give their kingdom to this wild beast until some end predetermined by the God's words will have been accomplished.
Obviously. But is it the same as "biting the hand that feeds us" to discuss whether our current explanation of this chapter is reasonable? Is our end-time-scenario too sacrosanct to question in any way. Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider where our loyalties will lie if things seem NOT to be working out as expected? Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider the meaning of Jesus words about not being able to work out the closeness of the time of the end if things DO INDEED seem to be working out as expected?
As several people already know, I come at this issue from the perspective that Jesus warned us against trying to look at signs of the times to divine the closeness of the end. It will come as a "thief in the night." Some of us will answer, but we won't be surprised, or in the dark, as someone who is awake and prepared for the thief. That's true, of course, but not because we will be able to figure out the time or season in which the thief will appear. Not because we will be watching for some entity to call out "peace and security." It's because we as Christians will be both patient and ready at all times because we are always looking out that our motivations are pure. Peter says we stay ready by watching ourselves and the type of person we ought to be, and clarifies the motivations behind all our activity in 2 Peter 1:5-8:
5 For this very reason, put forth all earnest effort+ to supply to your faith virtue,+ to your virtue knowledge,+ 6 to your knowledge self-control, to your self-control+ endurance, to your endurance godly devotion,+ 7 to your godly devotion brotherly affection, to your brotherly affection love.+ 8 For if these things exist in you and overflow, they will prevent you from being either inactive or unfruitful*+ regarding the accurate knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. There have always been those persons who think they are doing a favor to fellow Witnesses, or perhaps also highlighting their own faith in the predicted scenario by watching out for any mention of "peace and security" by a Pope, a world leader, or a UN representative. The initial post in this topic goes to a lot of trouble to try to read between the lines for items coming from the UN that somehow indicate that "they" could turn against and attack religion at any time. I think this is unhealthy and unchristian for several reasons. But I've already gone into detail about this aspect in other posts in the past.
This doesn't mean the scenario is impossible, only that Jesus said it was wrong to look for such scenarios as a way to anticipate the closeness of the end or to try to predict the timing his parousia. They might create some fervor and anticipation about the closeness of the end, but they will produce an unchristian motivation.
And, as I've also said, it would not be honest for me to discuss the question at hand without also mentioning that I think the whole scenario should be questioned. And, as I've also said, I think as Christians we are under an obligation to question such scenarios as to whether they are Biblical or even useful.

Yes, I actually agree with your point here. Here is what you explained in the post:
I agree with this. I was too anxious to jump off on a tangent to focus on a specific area of disagreement, so that I never even responded to what you were saying.
Jesus does indeed seem to imply a potentially longer period of time for the labor pains, and it does give the impression that there is even nothing wrong with saying that the "labor pains" he speaks of sound as if they can start even at the very beginning of a pregnancy. It's not what the word usually refers to of course.
In fact, you probably knew that the real source was the Watchtower magazine on jw.org, not just the Internet in general when I said above: 
The original-language word rendered “pangs of distress” refers to the intense pain experienced during childbirth. [Source: Internet] Our current doctrine puts the beginning of the labor pains at WWI, at the very beginning of the generation. Jesus implies this is possible. After all, who is to say that one of those wars or earthquakes would not occur in the year 34 CE just a year after Jesus gave the prophecy, at the very beginning of that generation? Some persons, perhaps even some apostles, were bound to be misled into thinking that a war or earthquake or some other event was a "sign" that the expected Parousia was imminent. This must be why Paul said in 2 Thess 2:1,2:
However, brothers, concerning the presence [Parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christa and our being gathered together to him, we ask you 2  not to be quickly shaken from your reason nor to be alarmed either by an inspired statement or by a spoken message or by a letter appearing to be from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here.  [Can't help but notice that Paul apparently equates the "Parousia" here with the "day of Jehovah." And this is not the only place.]
It's a very similar discussion of the Parousia from the end of 1 Thess 4 to the beginning of 1 Thess 5 which includes of course:
we the living who survive to the presence [Parousia] of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; 16  because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet . . .  Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2  For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night. 3  . . . just like birth pains on a pregnant woman, and they will by no means escape. 4  I come at this with the idea, of course, that both Paul and Jesus are dealing with the question of "When can we expect the Parousia?" and "Will there be any kind of sign, or advance warning?" Since I think that Jesus was referring more directly to the situation of the first generation of Jewish Christian disciples who would still be around Jerusalem, he knew that there would be wars and events and even teachers that might influence them to mistake the sign to get out of Jerusalem. There would be all kinds of ideas about how this or that teacher, or apostle, or another Messiah could mislead them by convincing arguments, or by saying to pay attention to this or that major earthquake, or major war. Paul was more addressing people around Greece, Macedonia and Thessalonika who would not be as much affected by the Romans trampling through Jerusalem. But the question was still the same, because it was still assumed that the same destruction of the Temple would be instantly followed by the end of all things, worldwide. 
To me of course, I think Jesus is saying that these things (wars, etc) are NOT related to the Parousia (the highly visible royal judgment event), but are things that people will easily mistake as signs of the impending judgment event. And another danger, of course, is that disciples might think it necessary to begin counting these as part of the Parousia and then wonder why the real Parousia is delayed, being thus disheartened and discouraged, as "expectation postponed is making the heart sick."
In the previous post I showed how Jesus theme was also the suddenness and unexpectedness of the end [Parousia/Synteleia]. It was primarily in this sense that I meant that Jesus and Paul were covering the same subject matter.
You say that Jesus uses the aspect of their heralding the start of a period or stage leading to an inevitable conclusion. This is true, but not necessarily so different from what Paul is talking about, although I agree that Paul focuses on the suddenness and unexpectedness (as a thief in the night). Jesus also mentions the unexpectedness and suddenness of course, but attaches the word pangs to events could occur earlier, long before the end.
[Hopefully, this covers enough of the separate questions you posted, too.]
I think there is still an important point to repeat for clarity, which is that while Jesus does indeed speak of the pangs even at the beginning instead of just at the end, Jesus does not attach these early pangs to the Parousia/Synteleia. He clearly divorces these early mistaken/misleading signs from any kind of useful sign that might answer their question about the end. I'm sure that's the specific point where we still disagree.

Loved this. Spot on. It's the very thesis of what I am trying to say with this entire post.
Also, of course, Knorr said nothing really wrong in this talk. It was heavier on politics than we are now. And it still identified Babylon the Great with the religion of the Pope and the Vatican. Otherwise, I found the talk very interesting and informative, and perfectly situated to the conditions and interests of the time. I also believe that the idea of a UN-like organization is a pretty good solution to figuring out what a modern-day interpretation of Revelation 17 would look like. Not necessarily definitive, of course, since "new light" can come out at any time. But it's a very reasonable interpretation that has withstood the test of time for several decades.

I only saw Bro. Knorr on the platform, I never met him personally. His speaking style was a little dry I found, and the talks. whilst containing interesting material seemed....quite long?
Anyway, he made quite an impression on Gileadites I knew (Bro Knorr said this and that). Interestingly, one thing he was reported as saying (by more than one I knew) was that the blood transfusion issue wuld be resolved before the system ends. Back then (early 70s), it was probably the most common, secular bone of contention I met in the field ministry. In fact, even in the early 80s, when my first child arrived, my wife was turned away from the maternity unit of a major  hospital simply because she was one of Jehovah's Witnesses and that without repercussion or sympathy. When another child arrived in the late 90's, the same hospital was providing 5 star customer care for Jehovah's Witnesses in non-blood medical management, with even other patients requesting similar treatment for secular reasons. And as for the ministry, now the blood issue hardly gets a mention. And with the Padua conference referenced elsewhere on the forum, who knows what the future holds in this area.
Do I think Bro.Knorr was serving as a Biblically styled prophet in this? Hardly! Do I think he was serving similarly in the remarks made in connection with the emergence of the United Nations? Never given it a thought, despite the rhetoric. Do I think the Bible prophecy of Revelation 17:8 applying to the re-emergence of a world club of nations from an abyss of World War 2 inactivity was fulfilled in the set up of the UN? Yes I do!
Not so close a look required really. Bro.Knorr's talk on 20 Sep 1942 appears to have correctly acknowledged the non-WTBS origin of Roosevelt's coined term from the earlier 1 January 1942 Declaration of United Nations. (https://www.unmultimedia.org/searchers/yearbook/page.jsp?volume=1946-47&page=36)
Bro. Knorr's talk referenced that: "One of the president's own cabinet members says: 'A world organization, with the United Nations as its base, will determine the peace, and the postwar world will be policed by the allied powers'." (P12 Peace - Can It Last? 1942 WTBS).
What is a bit more interesting is the action awareness of the prophetic indicators of Revelation 17 drove. It is always encouraging to see how the faith of others drives action that can then be blessed by Jehovah. Hebrews chapter 11 certainly sets a strong theme in this regard.
But of far more significance than "someone getting something right" is what motivates God fearing ones to act in harmony with the truths they have become aware of. And the results, which far exceed anything that could be expected through the efforts of puny, imperfect men, bring glory and praise to the one who motivates and empowers faithful ones. The modern day fulfillment of Acts 1:8 "..you will receive power when the holy spirit comes upon you, and you will be witnesses of me..." is thrilling indeed for those who are a part of it and who give Jehovah and His son Jesus Christ the credit for their success.
And do you know what? These demonstrations of faith, the god-glorifying results of the preaching work, and the credit for it all going to Jehovah still takes place even when "someone gets something wrong!"
 
(PS to @JWInsider, I wrote this up before your more recent posting on the topic. Just didn't get time to post it. I hadn't refreshed the screens to see yours with some similar quotes.)

In process of reading many of your comments, especially about pregnancy and birth time, i learned a lot. But what is interesting to me in trying to connect all this information, i can put in this form of conclusion:
What Jesus meant and why while using such descriptions - and what his listeners concluded and understand is one thing. Something else is what (second or third opinion...) is what we today thinking about all that and what we derivate as conclusion/s about what He meant or even told in original form before so many centuries.
But human must try and try and try .... and never to stop

Early contractions coming  before or during the eighth month are a danger sign, indicating that something is wrong with the woman or the baby - e.g. the womb not expanding or some other ailment. There is nothing normal about that. That is premature and a hospitalization event, sometimes meriting a Caesarean section. So I don't think Jesus would be talking about that - he would be considering what is the usual thing.

According to the group InvisibleChildren.org, 1 out of 5 children in the United States will be sexually abused before they turn 18 years old. It follows that you should be able to look anywhere and find a bumper crop of abuse cases. Most likely, child sexual abuse within the Jehovah’s Witness community is significantly less prevalent than in the greater world. The reason abuse is linked with Jehovah’s Witnesses is that the latter make a point of investigating wrongdoing in their ranks for the purpose of applying discipline and safeguarding congregation members from such ones. There are cumulatively a lot of child sexual abuse cases, but there are many more anywhere else. However, they are never linked with religion (how often do you hear religious affiliation when an abuser is nabbed by the authorities?) because no one else is proactive enough to look into such things in their own ranks.
Witnesses worldwide attend annual Regional Conventions, for (usually) three days of instruction based upon Bible teachings. During 2017 a section dealing with child sexual abuse was a part of the program. Especially emphasized was the fact that a perpetrator is likely to be someone a child knows and trusts. If a relative, or friend, or anyone else, seems overly attentive to your child, it is a reason to be watchful, said the program speaker.  If there are tickling sessions, if there are sleepovers, if there are trips alone to the public restroom, if—there were several other scenarios. They are all potential red flags: maybe harmless, but maybe not, and the parent must be aware.
Nobody, but nobody, assembles their entire membership as Jehovah’s Witnesses did and reviews detailed scenarios under which abuse might happen so that parents, the first line of defense, can educate their children and themselves. Thus the Witness organization is quite proactive at combatting what has turned out to be a worldwide pandemic.
It is not accurate to say that Jehovah’s Witnesses are forbidden to contact outside authorities in the event of child sexual abuse; plain statements appear on both their printed and digital literature that they are free to do so. I would not challenge, however, that many, especially in the past, have been loath to do so, as it is the very opposite of what they aspire to be and of what they advertise.
The new ebook addresses the topic in a chapter of 9000-some words. After relating matters pertaining to the Russian ban, Part 2 explores the accusation s made against the Witness organization and the defences on might make. (Pedophile charges did not come up there, but they do in other areas)
The ebook is entitled Dear Mr. Putin – Jehovah’s Witnesses Write Russia, and can be downloaded for free in PDF and EPUB version at https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/815620
There is also a version that is exactly the same except that all quotes from extremist sources are redacted: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/826384
Chapter 12 is entitled Pedophiles.

His answer to that question is simple. No one knows the day or hour, only the Father. (Matt.24:36). So no sign was given to indicate that element. All the focus must be elsewhere to understand what was said.

Discuss the question from the title of the topic? Now that's a novel idea. ?
It is a reasonable solution to see the 10-horns and the wild beast as either representing, or some part of the dominant world power at the time of the great tribulation, the fall of Babylon the Great, Armageddon, etc. And it is a reasonable assumption to see the prostitute as false religion. And it seems that God puts a thought into the heart of the ten horns and the heart of the wild beast to give their kingdom to this wild beast until some end predetermined by the God's words will have been accomplished.
Obviously. But is it the same as "biting the hand that feeds us" to discuss whether our current explanation of this chapter is reasonable? Is our end-time-scenario too sacrosanct to question in any way. Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider where our loyalties will lie if things seem NOT to be working out as expected? Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider the meaning of Jesus words about not being able to work out the closeness of the time of the end if things DO INDEED seem to be working out as expected?
As several people already know, I come at this issue from the perspective that Jesus warned us against trying to look at signs of the times to divine the closeness of the end. It will come as a "thief in the night." Some of us will answer, but we won't be surprised, or in the dark, as someone who is awake and prepared for the thief. That's true, of course, but not because we will be able to figure out the time or season in which the thief will appear. Not because we will be watching for some entity to call out "peace and security." It's because we as Christians will be both patient and ready at all times because we are always looking out that our motivations are pure. Peter says we stay ready by watching ourselves and the type of person we ought to be, and clarifies the motivations behind all our activity in 2 Peter 1:5-8:
5 For this very reason, put forth all earnest effort+ to supply to your faith virtue,+ to your virtue knowledge,+ 6 to your knowledge self-control, to your self-control+ endurance, to your endurance godly devotion,+ 7 to your godly devotion brotherly affection, to your brotherly affection love.+ 8 For if these things exist in you and overflow, they will prevent you from being either inactive or unfruitful*+ regarding the accurate knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. There have always been those persons who think they are doing a favor to fellow Witnesses, or perhaps also highlighting their own faith in the predicted scenario by watching out for any mention of "peace and security" by a Pope, a world leader, or a UN representative. The initial post in this topic goes to a lot of trouble to try to read between the lines for items coming from the UN that somehow indicate that "they" could turn against and attack religion at any time. I think this is unhealthy and unchristian for several reasons. But I've already gone into detail about this aspect in other posts in the past.
This doesn't mean the scenario is impossible, only that Jesus said it was wrong to look for such scenarios as a way to anticipate the closeness of the end or to try to predict the timing his parousia. They might create some fervor and anticipation about the closeness of the end, but they will produce an unchristian motivation.
And, as I've also said, it would not be honest for me to discuss the question at hand without also mentioning that I think the whole scenario should be questioned. And, as I've also said, I think as Christians we are under an obligation to question such scenarios as to whether they are Biblical or even useful.

I should add that it's very possible for the disciples in 33 CE to hear these words on their own without the context and understand them to say that wars, food shortages and earthquakes would be signs that the end would be nearly upon them. We can't be blamed for seeing them the way the Watchtower explains them, because the Watchtower has always relied on re-translations of the words in Matthew 24 which tend to remove the meaning in context. 
There is a good example of this mistranslation in the Matthew 24:8 above, where it supposedly says "All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress." The KJV is often followed as closely as possible by at least half of the modern English translations whenever the differences do not seem that important. So about half of the English translations are very similar to ours. But a little more than half, from a check of 40 translations, include a translation of the Greek particle "de" which the KJV and the NWT skips here. In other words we translate it as if it said:
πάντα ταῦτα ἀρχὴ ὠδίνων when it really says:
πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ἀρχὴ ὠδίνων Why is the word important? It changes the meaning from:
"All these things are a beginning of birth pains" to:
"But all these things are but a beginning of birth pains." In other words it emphasizes that something is missing or even wrong in the natural understanding of the previous statement about wars and earthquakes and famines. Here's why. All the Greek lexicons mention something like the following:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1161&t=KJV
δέ dé, deh; a primary particle (adversative or continuative) STRONGS NT 1161: δέ δέ (related to δή, as μέν to μήν, cf. Klotz ad Devar. ii. 2, p. 355), a particle adversative, distinctive, disjunctive 1. universally, by way of opposition and distinction; it is added to statements opposed to a preceding statement: ἐάν ὀφθαλμός κτλ. Matthew 6:23; ἐλεύσονται δέ ἡμέραι, Mark 2:20; it opposes persons to persons or things previously mentioned It's true that it isn't ALWAYS translated, but when the context repeatedly refers to the possibility of a misunderstanding then it is an important part of the meaning and must be translated. (Matthew 24 repeatedly and explicitly mentions the possibility of misunderstanding or being misled.)
This is why, when we bring in the meaning of context with the original Greek meaning of the words (including: parousia, synteleia, de, etc) we would have a meaning that more likely fits the following scenario:
Disciples: Please, can you tell us when this destruction of Jerusalem's Temple will occur? Can you tell us the sign that we should look for when we know that the final end and your final manifestation is about to happen?  Jesus responds: Look out that nobody misleads you. Many people will come around, even on the basis of my name, saying they represent me, yet they will mislead many. [You could easily be misled by the fact that] there will be wars, earthquakes and famines. Don't be tempted to raise the alarm based on such things, because these kinds of things will keep taking place [as they always have]. All these things are but a beginning of the birth pains, [not the end of all things that you are asking about]. The reason Jesus said this becomes clear in the rest of the chapter when he mentions the suddenness and unexpectedness of the end. It can't be predicted. It's as if two persons were going about their business grinding at a mill, and one was taken and one wasn't. It's the way it happens with most pregnancies, when the mother-to-be can be going about her business, and suddenly and unexpectedly a pain comes upon her. It's the way it happens with a bolt of bright lightning that suddenly happens. It's the way it happened in Noah's day when people didn't really believe or expect it to happen and suddenly the flood sweeps them away. It's the same way it happened in the days of Lot and Sodom when, without warning, fire came from heaven and destroyed them.

After having spent twenty five and more years discussing things like this with people who have strong ideas about such things ... but like myself, NOT HAVING THE SLIGHTEST CLUE, I have given up even caring about such things.
Things ARE WHAT THEY ARE .... and,
THEY ARE NOT WHAT THEY ARE NOT
... and a million word exposition  by the clueless ... myself included ... will not change that.
Do the best you can ... chill out ... have a beer ...  relax ... take more naps.  Pay more attention to your children while you still can.
Most "pangs of distress", I have found ... are self inflicted.
About the OTHER "pangs of distress" ... soon ... perhaps too soon ... we will all know.
I will probably be worse if you built your home on the side of an active volcano, or you live close to Yellowstone Park.

Nice points from both of you. 
For my son I had an intuitive feeling that something was about to happen but no significant signs, e.g. broken amniotic sac or contractions.   Since I was tired only, I checked myself in  just before sunset and had the baby just after midnight , although the nurse told me I was not in labour.  Just to show that sometimes one can't go by the normal signs. Still shows you have to be always ready, as you are expectant.

"Whenever it is that they are saying: ‘Peace and security!’ then sudden destruction is to be instantly upon them just as the pang of distress upon a pregnant woman; and they will by no means escape.” (1 Thess. 5:2, 3) 
"A woman is pregnant for 9 months, but pangs of distress or contractions usually start occurring during the last 3 months."  The scripture above is more true to life.
Pangs of distress usually come instantly and unexpectedly at the end of the last trimester - a day or two  before or a few hours before. 
The metaphor in Matthew 24:8 is still fitting as the conditions were distressful ever since the beginning of the last days since 1914. Distressing things would be happening concomitantly with happy things like celebrations, etc. We had a joyous, sumptuous wedding last weekend but we also had a shooting, an ongoing volcanic eruption, a  plane crash around the same time.

I don't question that Revelation 17 has an important meaning for us.
Yes. We should always pay attention to our teaching. 1 Tim 4:16: "Pay close attention to your life and to your teaching. Persevere in these things, for by so doing you will save both yourself and those who hear you." [Berean]
If this Watchtower eschatological scenario could be absolutely known for sure to be correct then I would think that some hints could be discerned from political and ideological developments. Of course, I trust that Jesus' words preclude any human from knowing absolutely what the future scenario might look like. However, when the Bible says that God puts the idea in their hearts it likely means (as the Watchtower teaches) that Jehovah allows these entities to go ahead with intentions that already existed in some form. Therefore, such a future scenario could very well be discernible to some extent in advance. To the extent that anyone might feel it useful to look for such hints as a way of testing the validity of the teaching then there is a legitimate reason to "test the spirits." [1 John 4:1]. But I would think there are much more basic and important Bible principles to test against before we can get to that point.  
I think Jesus told us why. He made it clear that the very topic of the end and the natural desire to get advance information about when it would occur would result in much confusion and persons who would end up misleading others, either on purpose or just human nature. So Jesus made it clear that there would be a lot of things happening that people would latch onto in order to claim that they KNEW more about the closeness of the end. So Jesus made it clear that wars would continue to happen, but that they shouldn't get all excited and think this was a sign that the end must be close. Jesus made the same point about earthquakes that might shake someone from their reason and make them think the due time had approached. Or pestilence, famine, persecution. All these things would go on happening, but there was no reason to become inordinately excited. In fact, Jesus added that during the period leading up to the final end [the synteleia/parousia] people would be marrying and being given in marriage, people would be eating and drinking, and the parousia would come upon most of them as if without any warning. In other words, these people would be crying out 'there is peace and security' before sudden destruction came upon them. Peter adds that scoffers could even say 'Where is this promised parousia [that will shine brightly like lightning from one part of the heavens all the way across to the other]? Things are still going on just as they always have.
So, yes, Jesus gave a lot of details about the prophecy related to the end times, but many of those details were to show that there would be NO specific details that could be seen as an advance sign of the end, but that Christians should remain active and endure patiently in spite of the lack of signs. But when the end finally came, THEN there would be an unmistakable sign that this parousia was upon us suddenly like bright visible lightning.

I hate when people do this.
Ford had just assumed the presidency and pardoned Nixon. At a NYC District Convention the next day, the speaker held aloft the NYDaily headlines - "Peace and Security!" and said: "Have you seen this headline??!!!"
It was irresistable. I would have done it, too.

Discuss the question from the title of the topic? Now that's a novel idea. ?
It is a reasonable solution to see the 10-horns and the wild beast as either representing, or some part of the dominant world power at the time of the great tribulation, the fall of Babylon the Great, Armageddon, etc. And it is a reasonable assumption to see the prostitute as false religion. And it seems that God puts a thought into the heart of the ten horns and the heart of the wild beast to give their kingdom to this wild beast until some end predetermined by the God's words will have been accomplished.
Obviously. But is it the same as "biting the hand that feeds us" to discuss whether our current explanation of this chapter is reasonable? Is our end-time-scenario too sacrosanct to question in any way. Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider where our loyalties will lie if things seem NOT to be working out as expected? Or is perhaps now the best opportune time to consider the meaning of Jesus words about not being able to work out the closeness of the time of the end if things DO INDEED seem to be working out as expected?
As several people already know, I come at this issue from the perspective that Jesus warned us against trying to look at signs of the times to divine the closeness of the end. It will come as a "thief in the night." Some of us will answer, but we won't be surprised, or in the dark, as someone who is awake and prepared for the thief. That's true, of course, but not because we will be able to figure out the time or season in which the thief will appear. Not because we will be watching for some entity to call out "peace and security." It's because we as Christians will be both patient and ready at all times because we are always looking out that our motivations are pure. Peter says we stay ready by watching ourselves and the type of person we ought to be, and clarifies the motivations behind all our activity in 2 Peter 1:5-8:
5 For this very reason, put forth all earnest effort+ to supply to your faith virtue,+ to your virtue knowledge,+ 6 to your knowledge self-control, to your self-control+ endurance, to your endurance godly devotion,+ 7 to your godly devotion brotherly affection, to your brotherly affection love.+ 8 For if these things exist in you and overflow, they will prevent you from being either inactive or unfruitful*+ regarding the accurate knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. There have always been those persons who think they are doing a favor to fellow Witnesses, or perhaps also highlighting their own faith in the predicted scenario by watching out for any mention of "peace and security" by a Pope, a world leader, or a UN representative. The initial post in this topic goes to a lot of trouble to try to read between the lines for items coming from the UN that somehow indicate that "they" could turn against and attack religion at any time. I think this is unhealthy and unchristian for several reasons. But I've already gone into detail about this aspect in other posts in the past.
This doesn't mean the scenario is impossible, only that Jesus said it was wrong to look for such scenarios as a way to anticipate the closeness of the end or to try to predict the timing his parousia. They might create some fervor and anticipation about the closeness of the end, but they will produce an unchristian motivation.
And, as I've also said, it would not be honest for me to discuss the question at hand without also mentioning that I think the whole scenario should be questioned. And, as I've also said, I think as Christians we are under an obligation to question such scenarios as to whether they are Biblical or even useful.

Had to caution a few brothers that were sending out thoughts on Facebook and a few places on the matter of looking for God's intervention in human affairs "whenever it is that they are saying "Peace and security!" around the time (a few weeks ago)  America seemed to be making progress in securing peace between North Korea and the West. I reminded them about Jesus' words at  Matthew 24:42-44, as follows:
"(Matthew 24:42-44) Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 “But know one thing: If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it."
 At the transfiguration Jehovah told Jesus' disciples to "Listen to him".   These sayings are from the same source, Jehovah, but we have to be sober and not run off with one but not weighing the other.  We know the season we are in, but we will not be able to work out the precise period of the end. No matter what we see now, the end is going to take us by surprise.  We should obey Jesus and prove ourselves ready. No one knows when a thief plans to come.  Jesus stated that it was at an hour that "you do not think to be it", referring to his disciples. So let us to take note but be modest, sober and most of all, ready.  So the question above is really timely.