Syria shot down a Russian plane on 17 Sept, and Russia said it would give Syria some S-300 missiles that a) had IFF that the S-200 missiles lack, so Syria would be unable to shoot down another Russian plane; and b) are capable of shooting down IAF planes. The missiles have been delivered, but no IAF planes have been shot down (and nor has another Russian plane). So no news.
Mr Jamal Khashoggi was murdered on 2 October, and everyone predicted something would happen. It didn't. MbS, the current unofficial ruler of Saudi Arabia (unofficial until his father's death, when he becomes the official ruler) is still supported by Trump, May, Macron, and Merkel and doesn't seem to be going anywhere (well, to world meetings like the G20, but not out of power); many want him replaced by another prince in the al-Saud tribe, but that hasn't happened, and the more time that passes since Jamal's death, the less likely it is that anyone will do anything. So no news.
The war in Yemen continues, and the New York Times is doing just as it did in Vietnam. Back when LBJ was president, the Vietnam war was necessary since North Vietnam attacked a US Navy ship in international waters, an incident equivalent to Pearl Harbor, and major US gains meant the war would soon be won. After Nixon took office, the war was an illegal action involving many war crimes, all based on Nixon's lie that North Vietnam attacked a US Navy ship in international waters, no progress was being made, and the US was absolutely unable to defeat North Vietnam was was just wasting money and US lives. During the last 5 years, rinse and repeat: while Obama was president, the US was helping the Saudi coalition stop terrorism in the Yemen; now that Trump is president, the war is all Trump's fault and is illegal and murdering thousands of babies and is in the newspapers daily, but the Congress voted not to vote on the war, and even if it ordered Trump to stop (as it ordered Obama to stop his regime change in Libya), Trump could just ignore them and no one could do anything. So, again, no news.
Huawei was winning the war for smartphones against the US, so the US declared Huawei illegal, asked all countries to arrest any Huawei officer travelling through them, and Canada obliged and arrested the CFO, who was denied bail for a week or two, but finally was bailed out with a multimillion (Canadian) dollar bail and an ankle bracelet. The US hopes it can get Huawei phones banned outside of China, and shut down the company. Not clear what will happen.
China is trying to figure out what to do. As the Chinese propaganda channel said back during the ZTE crisis, the US owns Android and iOS, so the US can prohibit export, and stop all smartphone production outside the US, but Trump didn't go that far with ZTE, just a few billion dollars in fines, and they could keep making Android phones. Now it is Huawei, and this looks more serious. China retaliated by arresting some Canadians, but it's not clear what Canada will do. The US is too close and too dangerous, and letting a few Canadians die in Chinese gaols is a small price to pay.
Unless, of course, things escalate to the point of war between the US and China, but Canada will probably write off any Canadians arrested in China, and say, 'Good Canadians don't ever go to China.' Not clear if China will try arresting some Americans, or what the US might do if China did.
Likewise, the US arrested a Russian who was in the US for an NRA convention and says she's a shpion. Her lawyers told her to confess she was an unregistered lobbyist, and now it's not clear what the US will do: deportation or prison. Or what Russia will do. The Ukraine is trying to get US warships into the Sea of Azov. Many US 'experts' say that MAD is no longer. The US has AD for any nation foolish enough to defy the orders of the US, orders which, as Thrasymachus would say, are legal and must be obeyed unless a nation is foolish enough to risk its own obliteration as happened to any nation that defied Rome back in the day. With the US, nations that never defied the US were obliterated, but those nations had no one to defend them (and not much in the way of defences).
Now the establishment media wants the US to force the DPRK, Russia, and China to comply with US military expansion, or else. But so far, nothing has happened. Some of us believe that, unlike places like Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and Syria and the Yemen, the DPRK, Russia, and China could do something, but a lot of damage would be done to any of them that provoke the US, so they might lay low and let the US do whatever it wants. Or not. And the US hasn't tried to do to any of those three what it did to Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and Syria and the Yemen.
Trump is still planning regime change in Iran in '19 to help with his re-election. Mueller is hoping to convince the Congress to impeach and convict, but he probably can't.
So things are likely to remain just as they are, and the children in the Yemen will continue to starve.
Friday, December 14, 2018
Friday, November 9, 2018
2018 Midterms and Israeli bombing Syria
As everyone predicted, the House is now narrowly Democrat, and the Senate is narrowly Republican, meaning the House can block any idiocy by the Senate and Trump. Not that they're likely to do so. The Republicans condemned Obama's regime change in Libya, but the regime got changed anyway. There was an act passed after Vietnam that the president can't unilaterally start a war, so it's just a military action unless the Congress votes to call it a war. The Congress have no control over anything except what it's called. And the Democrats let Bush, jr do whatever he said he had to do to keep the US safe. Torture? It's torture, punishable by death, if an enemy does it to an agent of the US government. If the US does it to an enemy of the US, the exact same procedure is just 'enhanced interrogation', completely legal under International Law (with the legality defined by Thrasymachus). Killing grandmothers and babies? Terrorists all. We thank our brave, brave soldiers for keeping us safe by killing them.
The Democrats will probably block any Republican attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare, but will probably let the Republicans do anything else they like. They'll send subpoenas to the White House every day, and Trump will invoke Executive Privilege, and he'll be backed up by his Supreme Court, so all the House can do is send the daily subpoena, annoying the White House and forcing them to write the daily 'Executive Privilege' letter.
Regime change in Iran is very likely in 2019, it's been planned since 2003. After all, the US courts said the Iranians funded the 9/11 attack and trained the hundreds of hijackers, a few of which are still incarcerated in Guantanamo, and the rest, of course, returned to heroes' welcomes in the Axis of Evil: Afghanistan, Iraq, the DPRK, Libya, Syria, and Cuba. Many don't realise that all those countries are co-religionists of the Ayatollahs, but the US President has access to intelligence the rest of us lack. So when Bush, jr and the US courts said no Saudi was involved, it was all the Axis of Evil, that's final, and was accepted by Obama and Trump (and again, we have to use the Thrasymachus definition of 'irrefutable proof').
Russia has sold a very few S-300 missiles to Syria, but RT says they cover less than 10% of Syria, so Israel can continue to bomb at will (Israeli intelligence would know where they are so the Israeli Air Force can avoid them). It seems, if the planes fly low, the S-300 is only effective over a 25 km range, and Russia only sold between 2 and 4 of them, so not much coverage (but Israel won't be able to safely bomb within 25 km of where the 2 or 4 are).
So RT has made it clear that, for protection, one must buy lots of S-400 anti-aircraft batteries. Two or four S-300s won't provide much protection at all. Decent marketing by the Russians.
The Democrats will probably block any Republican attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare, but will probably let the Republicans do anything else they like. They'll send subpoenas to the White House every day, and Trump will invoke Executive Privilege, and he'll be backed up by his Supreme Court, so all the House can do is send the daily subpoena, annoying the White House and forcing them to write the daily 'Executive Privilege' letter.
Regime change in Iran is very likely in 2019, it's been planned since 2003. After all, the US courts said the Iranians funded the 9/11 attack and trained the hundreds of hijackers, a few of which are still incarcerated in Guantanamo, and the rest, of course, returned to heroes' welcomes in the Axis of Evil: Afghanistan, Iraq, the DPRK, Libya, Syria, and Cuba. Many don't realise that all those countries are co-religionists of the Ayatollahs, but the US President has access to intelligence the rest of us lack. So when Bush, jr and the US courts said no Saudi was involved, it was all the Axis of Evil, that's final, and was accepted by Obama and Trump (and again, we have to use the Thrasymachus definition of 'irrefutable proof').
Russia has sold a very few S-300 missiles to Syria, but RT says they cover less than 10% of Syria, so Israel can continue to bomb at will (Israeli intelligence would know where they are so the Israeli Air Force can avoid them). It seems, if the planes fly low, the S-300 is only effective over a 25 km range, and Russia only sold between 2 and 4 of them, so not much coverage (but Israel won't be able to safely bomb within 25 km of where the 2 or 4 are).
So RT has made it clear that, for protection, one must buy lots of S-400 anti-aircraft batteries. Two or four S-300s won't provide much protection at all. Decent marketing by the Russians.
Friday, November 2, 2018
Living with the US of A
The US media keep saying that MAD no longer exists, the US military is so strong, they have impregnable defences and an offence that can completely destroy any enemy of the US. The US media say that Russia's recent video of MAD weapons that can penetrate US defences are just Photoshop, so the US is invulnerable, and can destroy any nation that does not do as they're told by the US (e.g., China and its 9-Dash Line).
Meaning, the nuclear powers led by sane leaders have to figure out what is the best thing they can do about the nuclear power led by a bunch of crazies.
For years, the US picked proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam with the USSR and China, or neo-Imperial wars with Iran, Grenada, Panama, Chile, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, etc., etc., and so managed to avoid the danger of a nuclear war, but then, the US knew that nuclear war meant MAD, and now they don't.
The Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is two minutes before midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
Meaning, the nuclear powers led by sane leaders have to figure out what is the best thing they can do about the nuclear power led by a bunch of crazies.
For years, the US picked proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam with the USSR and China, or neo-Imperial wars with Iran, Grenada, Panama, Chile, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, etc., etc., and so managed to avoid the danger of a nuclear war, but then, the US knew that nuclear war meant MAD, and now they don't.
The Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is two minutes before midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
Monday, October 22, 2018
Syria, Jamal, and nuclear test ban treaties
Lots has been happening since my last post. Russia is supposed to have deployed the S-300 in Syria on 20 October, but nothing in the news. Back in September, some Israelis wrote that Israel's US jets can easily evade and destroy the S-300 and S-400, and it's only a matter of time before all the S-300s and S-400s in Syria are destroyed by the Israeli Air Force. Those S-300s are supposed to be operational now, but no word from Russia about them, no S-300s shot at any Israeli jets, and no Israeli bombing raids on Syria in the news. Of course, the news isn't all that reliable, lots of Israeli bombing raids on Syria never made the news, because they're so common. But are Israeli bombing raids on Syria still as common as they were? No news I can find.
In Istanbul, Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi Consulate. For more than 2 weeks, Saudi said he was only there for a few minutes, left, and no one knew where he was. Turkey said, officially, 'Investigation in progress. No comment.' But rumours by anonymous person or persons unknown said Turkey had tapes of Jamal's brutal murder on the orders of MbS. Jamal was sent by another prince to promote Saudi Arabia to the Western media, and he did a very good job of it, wining and dining and flattering all the top journalists so every newspaper said what a great person (and journalist) Jamal was. And all the Western media are furious that he was killed on orders of MbS.
Before, Saudi was run by a consensus of all the leaders in the Alsaud family and the senior muftis. Somehow, MbS got complete, dictatorial control of everything. He developed a dislike for Jamal and ordered his murder in such a way that he could deny it, but it would be obvious that he'd done it as a message to anyone else who was thinking of possibly saying something without MbS's permission. MbS had a man who resembled Jamal leaving the Consulate, but Turkey showed tapes of Jamal entering and said he never left (they recently showed the video of the agent leaving, looking much like Jamal). MbS didn't offer Turkey enough baksheesh, or maybe he wants to show he's strong enough the Turks can't touch him. Turkey and the Western media want the Western governments to force Saudi to get a new and improved Crown Prince and get rid of MbS, but it's not clear if Western governments agree. Trump keeps waffling, as do May, Macron, and Merkel.
In yet more news, the US has announced it's abrogating some nuclear test ban treaties since Russia was cheating (no proof Russia was cheating, all evidence classified TS/SCI/NOFORN/BBR). Theories abound: China isn't part of the treaty, so the US wants a new and improved treaty that limits the Chinese nuclear force. There's also the fact that, when Reagan started an arms race with the USSR back in the '80s, the result was bankruptcy and collapse for the USSR in '89, and Russia is much poorer and weaker than the USSR, so an arms race that forces Russia into bankruptcy and complete collapse should be easy. Or so the US seems to think.
Someone wrote that Trump should learn from Truman. Probably. In '45, Truman knew Japan was defeated and had nothing to throw at the US, so he ordered the US military to drop every nuke they had on Japan (they only had 2 in August '45). In '49, the USSR developed a nuke. In '51, MacArthur wanted to nuke China, but Truman figured the USSR was a close ally of China and would provide them with an umbrella, so he fired MacArthur (as well he should have done). Now the 'experts' are saying the lesson Trump should learn is the one from '45, not the one from '51, while Russia and China are as weak as Japan was in '45, before they get as strong as the USSR was.
Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes before midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
In Istanbul, Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi Consulate. For more than 2 weeks, Saudi said he was only there for a few minutes, left, and no one knew where he was. Turkey said, officially, 'Investigation in progress. No comment.' But rumours by anonymous person or persons unknown said Turkey had tapes of Jamal's brutal murder on the orders of MbS. Jamal was sent by another prince to promote Saudi Arabia to the Western media, and he did a very good job of it, wining and dining and flattering all the top journalists so every newspaper said what a great person (and journalist) Jamal was. And all the Western media are furious that he was killed on orders of MbS.
Before, Saudi was run by a consensus of all the leaders in the Alsaud family and the senior muftis. Somehow, MbS got complete, dictatorial control of everything. He developed a dislike for Jamal and ordered his murder in such a way that he could deny it, but it would be obvious that he'd done it as a message to anyone else who was thinking of possibly saying something without MbS's permission. MbS had a man who resembled Jamal leaving the Consulate, but Turkey showed tapes of Jamal entering and said he never left (they recently showed the video of the agent leaving, looking much like Jamal). MbS didn't offer Turkey enough baksheesh, or maybe he wants to show he's strong enough the Turks can't touch him. Turkey and the Western media want the Western governments to force Saudi to get a new and improved Crown Prince and get rid of MbS, but it's not clear if Western governments agree. Trump keeps waffling, as do May, Macron, and Merkel.
In yet more news, the US has announced it's abrogating some nuclear test ban treaties since Russia was cheating (no proof Russia was cheating, all evidence classified TS/SCI/NOFORN/BBR). Theories abound: China isn't part of the treaty, so the US wants a new and improved treaty that limits the Chinese nuclear force. There's also the fact that, when Reagan started an arms race with the USSR back in the '80s, the result was bankruptcy and collapse for the USSR in '89, and Russia is much poorer and weaker than the USSR, so an arms race that forces Russia into bankruptcy and complete collapse should be easy. Or so the US seems to think.
Someone wrote that Trump should learn from Truman. Probably. In '45, Truman knew Japan was defeated and had nothing to throw at the US, so he ordered the US military to drop every nuke they had on Japan (they only had 2 in August '45). In '49, the USSR developed a nuke. In '51, MacArthur wanted to nuke China, but Truman figured the USSR was a close ally of China and would provide them with an umbrella, so he fired MacArthur (as well he should have done). Now the 'experts' are saying the lesson Trump should learn is the one from '45, not the one from '51, while Russia and China are as weak as Japan was in '45, before they get as strong as the USSR was.
Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes before midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
Sunday, October 7, 2018
Some serieous competitive marketing
Russia is a nuclear power that never wants to use MAD, so Russia backed down and said it would not challenge Turkey over Idlib. Shortly thereafter, the Israeli Air Force shot missiles at Syria from behind a Russian plane, the Syrians tried to shoot down the incoming missiles, and shot down the Russia plane. Israel was supposed to give Russia warning, but wanted to make sure the Iranians didn't have time to get out of the way of their missiles, and knew there was a good chance the Russian plane would get shot down, thereby causing the Russians to order the Syrians not to shoot at Israeli missiles. Didn't quite work.
Israel has been bombing Syria with complete impunity for many years, hundreds of bombing raids every year, and only one Israeli jet shot down (and the pilot bailed out unharmed). Syria only had Soviet air defences, by agreement between Russia and Israel. Russia thinks Israel violated the agreement, and delivered some of Russia's 2nd best SAMs. The US responded by upgrading the Israeli air force with planes that are sold to US customers as being able to evade the best Russian SAMs.
So it's competitive marketing. If Syria can shoot down the Israeli planes, Russian SAMs will sell like hotcakes, and US planes won't sell so well. If Syria cannot shoot down the Israeli planes, Russia will find it much harder to sell its SAMs, and countries will buy lots of US planes.
The Russian SAMs will be operational October 20. It's not clear how soon after that we'll see whether US or Russian weapons are better.
Israel has been bombing Syria with complete impunity for many years, hundreds of bombing raids every year, and only one Israeli jet shot down (and the pilot bailed out unharmed). Syria only had Soviet air defences, by agreement between Russia and Israel. Russia thinks Israel violated the agreement, and delivered some of Russia's 2nd best SAMs. The US responded by upgrading the Israeli air force with planes that are sold to US customers as being able to evade the best Russian SAMs.
So it's competitive marketing. If Syria can shoot down the Israeli planes, Russian SAMs will sell like hotcakes, and US planes won't sell so well. If Syria cannot shoot down the Israeli planes, Russia will find it much harder to sell its SAMs, and countries will buy lots of US planes.
The Russian SAMs will be operational October 20. It's not clear how soon after that we'll see whether US or Russian weapons are better.
Wednesday, October 3, 2018
What's next in Syria???
Russia said they would support the Syrian Arab Army to liberate Idlib from the terrorists. However, when Turkey said the full might of the Turkish armed forces would defend the peaceful pro-democracy forces fighting the evil Syrian regime (not to mention getting rid of all the Kurds in the northern 5th or so of Syria) Russia backed down and said Idlib would return to its status as an Ottoman colony. Russia's logistics fighting Turkey are not good. Russia has two of the greatest defensive generals the world has ever seen: General January and General February, but they only defend Mother Russia, not the Russian armed forces fighting in Syria.
Then something happened. The Israeli version is that the Syrians, seeing the Israelis professionally destroying a legitimate target, fired S-200 anti-missiles in all directions. Meanwhile, the Russians had not activated their IFF device, even though they were given ample warning from Israel that a legitimate target would be destroyed. The result was that the Syrians destroyed a Russian plane, and Israel had nothing to do with it. The Russians lied that Israeli planes were shooting their missiles from behind the Russian plane, and that the S-200 had no IFF, so the Syrian attempt to shoot down the missiles destroyed the Russian plane and it was Israel's fault. Israel says all their fighters were in International airspace or flying over Israeli territory, and the Russian map showing the Israeli planes behind the Russian plane was completely fake.
Russia said it would therefore deliver some S-300 missiles sold to Syria many years ago. Israel and the US said this would be a grave violation of International Law, and if anyone--Russians or Syrians--shot down an Israeli plane, there would be severe consequences. I wasn't sure if the S-300s would actually be delivered, but the Russians showed them being unloaded in Syria. They will be operational on 20 Oct, and Russia says any Israeli plane that attempts to bomb Syria after that date will be shot down. The US says its intelligence shows no S-300s were actually delivered, but if they are, it could mean the total destruction of Russia.
And here we are.
Probably, the Russian video is not the Photoshop the US claims that it is, so one must believe that Syria will have the S-300 operational on 20 Oct, as promised. However, the Israeli Air Force is one of the most advanced in the world. Maybe they have ECM that can neutralise the S-300 just as they have neutralised the S-200. We won't know until sometime on or after 20 Oct. If Israel manages another of its bombing raids without losing a single plane, we'll know the S-300 is not as advanced as advertised. If an Israeli jet gets shot down, we'll have to see what, if anything the US does. The US cat has gobbled up mouse after mouse after mouse, but now it seems to be looking at what it thinks is just another mouse, but is actually a bear.
Then something happened. The Israeli version is that the Syrians, seeing the Israelis professionally destroying a legitimate target, fired S-200 anti-missiles in all directions. Meanwhile, the Russians had not activated their IFF device, even though they were given ample warning from Israel that a legitimate target would be destroyed. The result was that the Syrians destroyed a Russian plane, and Israel had nothing to do with it. The Russians lied that Israeli planes were shooting their missiles from behind the Russian plane, and that the S-200 had no IFF, so the Syrian attempt to shoot down the missiles destroyed the Russian plane and it was Israel's fault. Israel says all their fighters were in International airspace or flying over Israeli territory, and the Russian map showing the Israeli planes behind the Russian plane was completely fake.
Russia said it would therefore deliver some S-300 missiles sold to Syria many years ago. Israel and the US said this would be a grave violation of International Law, and if anyone--Russians or Syrians--shot down an Israeli plane, there would be severe consequences. I wasn't sure if the S-300s would actually be delivered, but the Russians showed them being unloaded in Syria. They will be operational on 20 Oct, and Russia says any Israeli plane that attempts to bomb Syria after that date will be shot down. The US says its intelligence shows no S-300s were actually delivered, but if they are, it could mean the total destruction of Russia.
And here we are.
Probably, the Russian video is not the Photoshop the US claims that it is, so one must believe that Syria will have the S-300 operational on 20 Oct, as promised. However, the Israeli Air Force is one of the most advanced in the world. Maybe they have ECM that can neutralise the S-300 just as they have neutralised the S-200. We won't know until sometime on or after 20 Oct. If Israel manages another of its bombing raids without losing a single plane, we'll know the S-300 is not as advanced as advertised. If an Israeli jet gets shot down, we'll have to see what, if anything the US does. The US cat has gobbled up mouse after mouse after mouse, but now it seems to be looking at what it thinks is just another mouse, but is actually a bear.
Saturday, September 29, 2018
US Supreme Court: Partisanship in the extreme
Back in 1793, the Founding Fathers of the US figured 26 Senators had more resources (all were white, landed gentry, plantation owners from the South and industrialists from the North) than the president, just one man, and they could more thoroughly vet his nominees for high Federal positions, checking qualifications and skeletons in their closets. The Senate followed Roberts' Rules, so any Senator could delay any bill (or confirmation) for as long as he could keep talking, and 2/3 of the Senate was needed to vote for cloture, so, if more than 1/3 of all the Senators vehemently objected to a nominee, they could prevent confirmation, hence, all nominees had to be acceptable to more than 2/3. When one or more Senators delayed a bill by taking the floor and keeping it, so the bill could not come up to a vote without cloture, that acquired the name 'filibuster'.
Presidents always nominated men their assistants had assured them were very well qualified and had no past history that would be vehemently opposed. The Senate usually spent a few weeks checking that the president hadn't missed any scandal or lies on the nominee's CV, then generally confirmed him.
Then a very well qualified candidate with no scandals in his past was Borked by the Democrats, and that started the ball rolling down the snow-covered mountain. When Obama was elected, the Republicans tried to block every bill and appointment. The first two years, Obama had a filibuster-proof majority of 60, and got the ACA and 2 Supreme Court appointments: 2 Democrats replacing 2 Democrats, so the court remained 4 - 4 -1 (the 1 being Kennedy, a nominal Republican, but one who would join either the Democrats or the Republicans unpredictably). In 2010, the Democrats lost their filibuster-proof majority, and the Republicans began blocking all laws and appointments, with a few exceptions (they eventually agreed to keep the government running, after letting it 'shut down' once).
In response, the Democrats abolished the filibuster for all appointments except the Supreme Court, and managed to fill many of Obama's appointments until 2015, when the Republicans had a majority in the Senate. When a Republican justice on the Supreme Court died, the Republicans said they would never confirm anyone nominated by Obama, so his nominee, Garland, was never confirmed.
After Trump took office, he nominated a Republican justice to fill the place of the deceased Republican justice the Senate refused to let Obama replace. The Republicans abolished the last filibuster, that for Supreme Court justices, and quickly confirmed Trump's nominee.
Then Kennedy announced his retirement, and Trump appointed Kavanaugh, giving the Republicans a reliable 5 - 4 majority they had not had, and the Democrats went crazy. A minority without a filibuster, they began trying everything they could think of to block the confirmation. Nothing worked. On 13 Sept 2018, the Judiciary Committee, who first check the nominee, voted 11 - 10 to confirm as quickly as possible. The Democrats used their right to demand a one week delay, so the Committee was ready to vote to recommend confirmation on 20 Sept 2018, again, 11 - 10, after which the Senate was expected to vote the next day or the next week 51 - 49 to confirm.
Then the Democrats released a letter Prof Ford had sent months before that said the nominee had sexually abused her! That 11 - 10 vote to recommend confirmation became 12 - 9 to say no recommendation was possible before an investigation into Prof Ford's charges. The chair of the Judiciary committee wanted the investigation to take place on Monday, 24 Sept, but Prof Ford objected. The Democrat's goal (and Prof Ford is a Democrat) is to delay the confirmation vote until January, when the Democrats might have a majority in the Senate. The Committee gave her until 27 September, when she appeared and tearfully recounted the abuse. She had no idea of the day, date, time, or year, only early to mid '80s, most likely 1982, but not absolutely certain. Then the nominee Kavanaugh defended himself, showing that he kept detailed calendars of when and where he was since the '70s. No meeting with a young Prof Ford. But there are blank spaces on his calendars, and he needs an alibi for every hour of every day from 1980 until 1986, since Ford has absolutely no idea when the abuse happened, but she is sure that it must have been when Kavanaugh has no alibi.
Every Democrat 'knows' Prof Ford is telling the truth and Kavanaugh is lying. Most Republicans 'know' Ford is lying and Judge Kavanaugh is telling the truth. Every Democrat 'knows' that, even if there's no proof, one cannot appoint someone to the US Supreme Court with an allegation of sexual abuse hanging over him. Most Republicans 'know' that, if there's no proof, one cannot deny someone an appointment to the US Supreme Court based on an unproven allegation.
The Republicans had a 51 - 49 majority to confirm. On 28 September, the Judiciary Committee voted 11 - 10 to recommend confirmation as quickly as possible, but Senator Flake, who was one of the 11, said he did not want to vote to confirm before an FBI investigation (even though he voted to recommend confirmation as quickly as possible).
So now no one knows what will happen if the Senate majority leader calls for a vote. Do the Republicans still have 51 votes? They only need 50 to confirm. Do they even have 50? No one knows.
The Democrats have played a very weak hand brilliantly. Kavanaugh would be a confirmed member of the Supreme Court by now had it not been for Ford's unprovable accusation, to which two more Democrat women quickly joined with more allegations of sexual abuse (but the Judiciary Committee only agreed to hear Ford). The Democrats desperately want an investigation that drags out until January. The Republican leadership desperately want to confirm before January, but may or may not have the votes, and if they have a vote and confirmation is rejected, they can't have an investigation and a re-vote, one shot is all Kavanaugh gets. And time is running out to get a justice confirmed before January.
Presidents always nominated men their assistants had assured them were very well qualified and had no past history that would be vehemently opposed. The Senate usually spent a few weeks checking that the president hadn't missed any scandal or lies on the nominee's CV, then generally confirmed him.
Then a very well qualified candidate with no scandals in his past was Borked by the Democrats, and that started the ball rolling down the snow-covered mountain. When Obama was elected, the Republicans tried to block every bill and appointment. The first two years, Obama had a filibuster-proof majority of 60, and got the ACA and 2 Supreme Court appointments: 2 Democrats replacing 2 Democrats, so the court remained 4 - 4 -1 (the 1 being Kennedy, a nominal Republican, but one who would join either the Democrats or the Republicans unpredictably). In 2010, the Democrats lost their filibuster-proof majority, and the Republicans began blocking all laws and appointments, with a few exceptions (they eventually agreed to keep the government running, after letting it 'shut down' once).
In response, the Democrats abolished the filibuster for all appointments except the Supreme Court, and managed to fill many of Obama's appointments until 2015, when the Republicans had a majority in the Senate. When a Republican justice on the Supreme Court died, the Republicans said they would never confirm anyone nominated by Obama, so his nominee, Garland, was never confirmed.
After Trump took office, he nominated a Republican justice to fill the place of the deceased Republican justice the Senate refused to let Obama replace. The Republicans abolished the last filibuster, that for Supreme Court justices, and quickly confirmed Trump's nominee.
Then Kennedy announced his retirement, and Trump appointed Kavanaugh, giving the Republicans a reliable 5 - 4 majority they had not had, and the Democrats went crazy. A minority without a filibuster, they began trying everything they could think of to block the confirmation. Nothing worked. On 13 Sept 2018, the Judiciary Committee, who first check the nominee, voted 11 - 10 to confirm as quickly as possible. The Democrats used their right to demand a one week delay, so the Committee was ready to vote to recommend confirmation on 20 Sept 2018, again, 11 - 10, after which the Senate was expected to vote the next day or the next week 51 - 49 to confirm.
Then the Democrats released a letter Prof Ford had sent months before that said the nominee had sexually abused her! That 11 - 10 vote to recommend confirmation became 12 - 9 to say no recommendation was possible before an investigation into Prof Ford's charges. The chair of the Judiciary committee wanted the investigation to take place on Monday, 24 Sept, but Prof Ford objected. The Democrat's goal (and Prof Ford is a Democrat) is to delay the confirmation vote until January, when the Democrats might have a majority in the Senate. The Committee gave her until 27 September, when she appeared and tearfully recounted the abuse. She had no idea of the day, date, time, or year, only early to mid '80s, most likely 1982, but not absolutely certain. Then the nominee Kavanaugh defended himself, showing that he kept detailed calendars of when and where he was since the '70s. No meeting with a young Prof Ford. But there are blank spaces on his calendars, and he needs an alibi for every hour of every day from 1980 until 1986, since Ford has absolutely no idea when the abuse happened, but she is sure that it must have been when Kavanaugh has no alibi.
Every Democrat 'knows' Prof Ford is telling the truth and Kavanaugh is lying. Most Republicans 'know' Ford is lying and Judge Kavanaugh is telling the truth. Every Democrat 'knows' that, even if there's no proof, one cannot appoint someone to the US Supreme Court with an allegation of sexual abuse hanging over him. Most Republicans 'know' that, if there's no proof, one cannot deny someone an appointment to the US Supreme Court based on an unproven allegation.
The Republicans had a 51 - 49 majority to confirm. On 28 September, the Judiciary Committee voted 11 - 10 to recommend confirmation as quickly as possible, but Senator Flake, who was one of the 11, said he did not want to vote to confirm before an FBI investigation (even though he voted to recommend confirmation as quickly as possible).
So now no one knows what will happen if the Senate majority leader calls for a vote. Do the Republicans still have 51 votes? They only need 50 to confirm. Do they even have 50? No one knows.
The Democrats have played a very weak hand brilliantly. Kavanaugh would be a confirmed member of the Supreme Court by now had it not been for Ford's unprovable accusation, to which two more Democrat women quickly joined with more allegations of sexual abuse (but the Judiciary Committee only agreed to hear Ford). The Democrats desperately want an investigation that drags out until January. The Republican leadership desperately want to confirm before January, but may or may not have the votes, and if they have a vote and confirmation is rejected, they can't have an investigation and a re-vote, one shot is all Kavanaugh gets. And time is running out to get a justice confirmed before January.
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
Russia's Next Move???
Putin claims that Russia supported Israel in the UN Security Council, helping Israel; however, the Israeli Air Force hid in the shadow of a Russian plane and fired missiles at Syria. Syrian forces saw the missiles coming and launched S-200 anti-missiles that hit the Russian plane, killing all 15 on board. Israel says it was entirely the fault of the incompetent Syrians. Putin says it was a tragic accident. The Russian propaganda channel says it was all Israel's fault: it was a deliberate move to use the Russian plane to shield the Israeli planes from the missiles, and maybe the destruction of the Russian plane was seen as an added bonus.
Years ago, Russia sold a few S-300 SAMs to Syria, but never delivered any of them after Israel and the US said, 'NO!'. Russia says the S-200 has no IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) that would have prevented it from hitting a Russian plane, but the S-300 does have, so it cannot hit a Russian plane, even if the Syrians shoot in the direction of a Russian plane by mistake. And Russia says it will deliver 3 S-300 systems to Syria next week. Israel and the United States say this will be an act of war by Russia that will be very harshly dealt with if a single Israeli plane gets shot down and the pilot killed. So will Russia deliver the 3 S-300 missiles? Not clear, after Russia meekly agreed that Northern Syria is the property of the Ottoman Empire, and Eastern Syria (with all Syria's petroleum products) is a US neo-colony.
Israel bombs Syria hundreds of times every year. The S-200s took down a single Israeli aeroplane (the pilot ejected safely), but, for the most part, Syria does not dare to even shoot at an Israeli plane. Back in '13, when Obama would have forced regime change in Syria had the UK Parliament not voted 'NO!' the US establishment press reported that Syria has one of the world's best air defences, so Obama's victory would have been heralded as military genius. But this 'best air defence' has only been used once against one Israel plane, because Israel has threatened that, if Syria shoots down one Israeli plane, Israel will carpet bomb Damascus, and the S-200s can't stop the entire Israeli Air Force from destroying Damascus (they might take out a plane or two, but most would complete their missions).
If the 3 S-300s are delivered, will they make a difference? Will they survive an Israeli strike? Will they even be delivered, or is the threat of delivery a tiny bargaining chip Russia is trying to use?
We'll have a pretty good idea by one week from next Monday, since that's when Russia promised delivery, so it must either deliver by Monday week or renege.
Back in '15, when Russia moved more troops into Syria to defend Russia's only Mediterranean base, the pundits said Russia had nothing. If Obama ordered Putin to step down, Putin had no choice but to meekly comply. The US could easily transform Syria from an impoverished, brutal dictatorship into a peaceful and prosperous democracy (as it had done for Iraq and Libya) and return those military bases on which Russia was squatting to their rightful owners: NATO. But Obama left finishing the job he'd started in Syria for St Hillary, whose supporters said she'd get rid of the evil Syrian dictator and put in a good democratic leader from the peaceful, pro-democracy activists in Syria (i.e., al-Qaeda and the ISL, but her supporters refuse to admit that), and do the same for Russia.
But St Hillary lost (and every Clintonbot knows Trump tweeted Putin passwords to pilfer the election, since St Hillary would have had more than 175% of the vote in any honest election), and Candidate Trump said he wanted peace with Syria and Russia. President Trump announced to the UN Security Council that he intends to liberate Iran. His cabinet say regime change in Iran is necessary, but he must not forget Syria and Russia. Does Russia have anything? Will Putin be gone and replaced with a 'good democrat' like Yeltsin who will dismantle the Russian military Putin started to rebuild?
Or will Russia stick to its promise and actually deliver those 3 S-300 systems it sold to Syria more than 5 years ago? We will know in less than a fortnight!
And then, we're promised, the Israeli bombing raids on Israel will finally stop.
Years ago, Russia sold a few S-300 SAMs to Syria, but never delivered any of them after Israel and the US said, 'NO!'. Russia says the S-200 has no IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) that would have prevented it from hitting a Russian plane, but the S-300 does have, so it cannot hit a Russian plane, even if the Syrians shoot in the direction of a Russian plane by mistake. And Russia says it will deliver 3 S-300 systems to Syria next week. Israel and the United States say this will be an act of war by Russia that will be very harshly dealt with if a single Israeli plane gets shot down and the pilot killed. So will Russia deliver the 3 S-300 missiles? Not clear, after Russia meekly agreed that Northern Syria is the property of the Ottoman Empire, and Eastern Syria (with all Syria's petroleum products) is a US neo-colony.
Israel bombs Syria hundreds of times every year. The S-200s took down a single Israeli aeroplane (the pilot ejected safely), but, for the most part, Syria does not dare to even shoot at an Israeli plane. Back in '13, when Obama would have forced regime change in Syria had the UK Parliament not voted 'NO!' the US establishment press reported that Syria has one of the world's best air defences, so Obama's victory would have been heralded as military genius. But this 'best air defence' has only been used once against one Israel plane, because Israel has threatened that, if Syria shoots down one Israeli plane, Israel will carpet bomb Damascus, and the S-200s can't stop the entire Israeli Air Force from destroying Damascus (they might take out a plane or two, but most would complete their missions).
If the 3 S-300s are delivered, will they make a difference? Will they survive an Israeli strike? Will they even be delivered, or is the threat of delivery a tiny bargaining chip Russia is trying to use?
We'll have a pretty good idea by one week from next Monday, since that's when Russia promised delivery, so it must either deliver by Monday week or renege.
Back in '15, when Russia moved more troops into Syria to defend Russia's only Mediterranean base, the pundits said Russia had nothing. If Obama ordered Putin to step down, Putin had no choice but to meekly comply. The US could easily transform Syria from an impoverished, brutal dictatorship into a peaceful and prosperous democracy (as it had done for Iraq and Libya) and return those military bases on which Russia was squatting to their rightful owners: NATO. But Obama left finishing the job he'd started in Syria for St Hillary, whose supporters said she'd get rid of the evil Syrian dictator and put in a good democratic leader from the peaceful, pro-democracy activists in Syria (i.e., al-Qaeda and the ISL, but her supporters refuse to admit that), and do the same for Russia.
But St Hillary lost (and every Clintonbot knows Trump tweeted Putin passwords to pilfer the election, since St Hillary would have had more than 175% of the vote in any honest election), and Candidate Trump said he wanted peace with Syria and Russia. President Trump announced to the UN Security Council that he intends to liberate Iran. His cabinet say regime change in Iran is necessary, but he must not forget Syria and Russia. Does Russia have anything? Will Putin be gone and replaced with a 'good democrat' like Yeltsin who will dismantle the Russian military Putin started to rebuild?
Or will Russia stick to its promise and actually deliver those 3 S-300 systems it sold to Syria more than 5 years ago? We will know in less than a fortnight!
And then, we're promised, the Israeli bombing raids on Israel will finally stop.
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
Syria loses Idlib to the Ottoman Empire
I read many Obamabots and Clintonbots (including the New York Times) say that Russia is not the USSR, but is a very minor power, on the level of Panamá, that all Russia's weapons are just Photoshop. A Frenchman and an Austrian figured that was true, and the Frenchman tried to force regime change in Russia, and the Austrian tried to force regime change in the USSR. Now, however, Turkey sent its army into Idlib, and said it would fight against any attempt to reattach Idlib to Syria. The rest of NATO said they'd support Turkey if Russia tried to take Idlib. After a couple of days (one in Tehran and one in Sochi) Putin agreed: Turkey can keep Idlib.
Then Israel sent four aircraft behind a Russian aircraft, and began firing missiles at Syria. Syria shot back, and shot down the Russian plane. Israel says it was obviously the fault of the incompetent Syrians. Putin says he'll do nothing about it (the Russian propaganda channel keeps saying it was obviously Israel's fault, but Putin has not said that, and that's not the official Russian position).
Is Russia just a paper tiger? Is it quite unable to stand up to the US, knows it, and will always back down? If so, WWIII is off the table, and the US will keep expanding its influence, and will continue killing anyone who objects to US hegemony. After all, the US is the Greatest Force for Good in the World (just read US history books), so US hegemony over the entire world is all for the best.
(Of course, there's a nation with a bigger GDP than the US, a stronger military than the US, and they've made Venezuela part of their Belt and Road, so they're vehemently opposed to regime change, which the US is threatening, so even if Russia will always back down, there's a much bigger player than Russia that might not. At least Venezuela must hope so.)
Then Israel sent four aircraft behind a Russian aircraft, and began firing missiles at Syria. Syria shot back, and shot down the Russian plane. Israel says it was obviously the fault of the incompetent Syrians. Putin says he'll do nothing about it (the Russian propaganda channel keeps saying it was obviously Israel's fault, but Putin has not said that, and that's not the official Russian position).
Is Russia just a paper tiger? Is it quite unable to stand up to the US, knows it, and will always back down? If so, WWIII is off the table, and the US will keep expanding its influence, and will continue killing anyone who objects to US hegemony. After all, the US is the Greatest Force for Good in the World (just read US history books), so US hegemony over the entire world is all for the best.
(Of course, there's a nation with a bigger GDP than the US, a stronger military than the US, and they've made Venezuela part of their Belt and Road, so they're vehemently opposed to regime change, which the US is threatening, so even if Russia will always back down, there's a much bigger player than Russia that might not. At least Venezuela must hope so.)
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
What's really happening in Syria???
The western establishment media (who are seldom foolish enough to actually go into Syria) say the Russians have started a massive bombing campaign, bombing schools and hospitals in Idlib and killing lots of children, while the Syrian Arab Army is massing all around Idlib for a brutal assault. They get this information from tweets sent out by al-Qaeda (under whatever name they're using now). One western reporter, Robert Fisk, who was foolish enough to go to Syria and drive the ring road around Idlib said he heard no bombing, so, while Russia admits it's bombing places sending missiles and drones to bomb Russian bases, the bombing must be very sporadic, or he'd have seen and heard it. The 'Syrian Arab Army' massing around Idlib' he did not see, just a few Syrian soldiers exchanging small arms fire with the peaceful, pro-democracy protesters (and some of their sniper fire came near him). Of course, during this month (which lasts until about 8 October), war is prohibited by Islam, so the Syrian assault to liberate Idlib might be planned for then.
The Russians say they have evidence that NATO (US/UK/France/Turkey) are planning to force regime change in Syria in the very near future. Their intelligence said that a US film crew went into Idlib and filmed a 'chemical attack' by the evil Syrian and Russian regimes, and this was done so the US/UK/France can say they have no choice but to force regime change since the evil Syrians and Russians are using chemical weapons. The film is now being edited, and will be sent to the UN and the OPCW, while out-takes will be posted on social media, whereupon the US/UK/France are already getting ready to start a Libyan-style regime change in Syria. Only it's not 2011 (a fact of which NATO do not seem to be aware, perhaps their calendars stopped because they forgot to wind them?). In 2011, Putin felt that Russia could not stand up to NATO, and Russia did not veto the UN resolution to attack Libya (the resolution did not mention regime change, but even if it had been explicit, Russia and China considered themselves too weak to challenge NATO for Libya). In 2018, Putin says Russia absolutely will not allow NATO to force regime change in Syria. Is Putin bluffing? NATO says he is, they say Yeltsin dismantled the Soviet military, and all Putin's 'weapons' are just Photoshop. When NATO starts bombing, Putin has no choice but to withdraw whatever is left of the Russian military and let NATO remove the evil Syrian regime, put a member of the peaceful, pro-democracy al-Qaeda in charge, and NATO will return to those NATO bases on which the USSR and then Russia have been squatting since the days of the current Syrian president's father. All the NATO 'experts' that I've read say Russia will be about as difficult an opponent as Grenada or Panamá were. Somehow, I don't have quite as much confidence in the NATO 'experts' as they have in themselves. Likewise, I have no idea if Russian intelligence is any good.
We'll all know very soon if Russian intelligence is right. If they're wrong about the NATO regime change in Syria being imminent, it might be awhile before we're sure they were wrong.
And if Russian Intelligence is correct, no one has a clue what will happen. I guess we'll find out.
The Russians say they have evidence that NATO (US/UK/France/Turkey) are planning to force regime change in Syria in the very near future. Their intelligence said that a US film crew went into Idlib and filmed a 'chemical attack' by the evil Syrian and Russian regimes, and this was done so the US/UK/France can say they have no choice but to force regime change since the evil Syrians and Russians are using chemical weapons. The film is now being edited, and will be sent to the UN and the OPCW, while out-takes will be posted on social media, whereupon the US/UK/France are already getting ready to start a Libyan-style regime change in Syria. Only it's not 2011 (a fact of which NATO do not seem to be aware, perhaps their calendars stopped because they forgot to wind them?). In 2011, Putin felt that Russia could not stand up to NATO, and Russia did not veto the UN resolution to attack Libya (the resolution did not mention regime change, but even if it had been explicit, Russia and China considered themselves too weak to challenge NATO for Libya). In 2018, Putin says Russia absolutely will not allow NATO to force regime change in Syria. Is Putin bluffing? NATO says he is, they say Yeltsin dismantled the Soviet military, and all Putin's 'weapons' are just Photoshop. When NATO starts bombing, Putin has no choice but to withdraw whatever is left of the Russian military and let NATO remove the evil Syrian regime, put a member of the peaceful, pro-democracy al-Qaeda in charge, and NATO will return to those NATO bases on which the USSR and then Russia have been squatting since the days of the current Syrian president's father. All the NATO 'experts' that I've read say Russia will be about as difficult an opponent as Grenada or Panamá were. Somehow, I don't have quite as much confidence in the NATO 'experts' as they have in themselves. Likewise, I have no idea if Russian intelligence is any good.
We'll all know very soon if Russian intelligence is right. If they're wrong about the NATO regime change in Syria being imminent, it might be awhile before we're sure they were wrong.
And if Russian Intelligence is correct, no one has a clue what will happen. I guess we'll find out.
Tuesday, September 4, 2018
Idlib
Islam prohibits war this month and next month; however, that means aggressive war, not defensive war. Syria says foreign jihadis invaded Idlib, so war against them is defensive. The fact that they've been shelling Latakia is one more reason the Syrians and Russians are saying this is a strictly defensive action, which is allowed, even in the four months when war is prohibited in Islam.
The problem is that NATO (i.e. the US, UK, France, and Turkey) have said they will not allow the Syrians and Russians to take Idlib, they will fight to defend the innocent, peaceful, pro-democracy activists (al-Qaeda and the ISL). Russia has said it will see that the abscess of jihadis in Idlib is removed. The Syrian Army is gathering around Idlib. The Russian and American fleets are sailing toward Syria. US, UK, and French planes are getting ready to bomb Syria. The Turkish Army is getting ready to defend Idlib.
I have read many columnists, reporters, and Internet commentators write that Putin is bluffing, his hand is nothing, not even a pair, while NATO holds a straight flush. He's been pretending Russia is still the USSR (with strictly Orthodox Marxism-Leninism, unlike the old, unOrthodox kind they had before), but as soon as NATO starts bombing Syria, he'll pull whatever is left of the Russian military out of Syria, NATO will finish regime change and all those military bases where the Russians have been squatting will return to their rightful owners, NATO.
Pity those columnists, reporters, and Internet commentators don't understand any of the new, clear fizzics. Some of us remember the Cuban missile crisis. It looked like the end of the world, but Kennedy called Khrushchev and said, 'I have to run for re-election, and you don't. If you'll say you gave me everything I asked for, I'll give you everything you're asking for.' And so, without letting anyone know, Kennedy removed all the US nukes from Turkey (we found out about 40 years later), Khrushchev said he'd capitulated completely because the US led by Kennedy was too strong and he knew he'd lose, and everyone lived (happily ever after, just because they were still alive, against every expectation).
Putin promised to shoot down any and all NATO planes attacking Syria, which would have escalated as NATO would have had to shoot back. So Trump called, and Putin gave NATO 3 abandoned, empty building they could bomb and no Russian anti-aircraft fire would be used. Trump claimed a great victory, three major weapons plants destroyed (but actually, nothing lost and no one got hurt). Putin officially fumed about the attack, but did nothing. And the phone call (which must have happened) is still Top Secret.
The establishment media said, 'Trump's no Obama. He only hit three buildings, when he should have carpet bombed Damascus the way Obama carpet bombed all the Libyan presidential residences and army until he achieved regime change. The evil Syrian and Russia regimes are still running Syria and Russia, so Trump is one of the worst presidents we've ever had for not forcing the regime change St Hillary promised, putting the good, democratic rebels in charge of Syria.' (Note that those 'democratic rebels' are al-Qaeda and the ISL.) And there it's sat for a year. But now Trump's cabinet and Trump (and the UK and France) have said they will not allow Russia to attack Idlib. After Trump said he would send the US military if Russia bombed Idlib, the jihadis immediately tweeted to Western reporters that Russia started bombing yesterday. Russia neither confirmed nor denied the bombing.
Yesterday was, of course, Labor Day, so the US was off, including most newspaper reporters. But today, everyone is back at work, the Russian bombing is starting to make the news as a fact (after all, al-Qaeda and the ISL cannot tell a lie, since their religion prohibits lying, plus the US and UK are paying them, and US and UK employees never lie), and all the establishment media are starting to scream. And so ...
The problem is that NATO (i.e. the US, UK, France, and Turkey) have said they will not allow the Syrians and Russians to take Idlib, they will fight to defend the innocent, peaceful, pro-democracy activists (al-Qaeda and the ISL). Russia has said it will see that the abscess of jihadis in Idlib is removed. The Syrian Army is gathering around Idlib. The Russian and American fleets are sailing toward Syria. US, UK, and French planes are getting ready to bomb Syria. The Turkish Army is getting ready to defend Idlib.
I have read many columnists, reporters, and Internet commentators write that Putin is bluffing, his hand is nothing, not even a pair, while NATO holds a straight flush. He's been pretending Russia is still the USSR (with strictly Orthodox Marxism-Leninism, unlike the old, unOrthodox kind they had before), but as soon as NATO starts bombing Syria, he'll pull whatever is left of the Russian military out of Syria, NATO will finish regime change and all those military bases where the Russians have been squatting will return to their rightful owners, NATO.
Pity those columnists, reporters, and Internet commentators don't understand any of the new, clear fizzics. Some of us remember the Cuban missile crisis. It looked like the end of the world, but Kennedy called Khrushchev and said, 'I have to run for re-election, and you don't. If you'll say you gave me everything I asked for, I'll give you everything you're asking for.' And so, without letting anyone know, Kennedy removed all the US nukes from Turkey (we found out about 40 years later), Khrushchev said he'd capitulated completely because the US led by Kennedy was too strong and he knew he'd lose, and everyone lived (happily ever after, just because they were still alive, against every expectation).
Putin promised to shoot down any and all NATO planes attacking Syria, which would have escalated as NATO would have had to shoot back. So Trump called, and Putin gave NATO 3 abandoned, empty building they could bomb and no Russian anti-aircraft fire would be used. Trump claimed a great victory, three major weapons plants destroyed (but actually, nothing lost and no one got hurt). Putin officially fumed about the attack, but did nothing. And the phone call (which must have happened) is still Top Secret.
The establishment media said, 'Trump's no Obama. He only hit three buildings, when he should have carpet bombed Damascus the way Obama carpet bombed all the Libyan presidential residences and army until he achieved regime change. The evil Syrian and Russia regimes are still running Syria and Russia, so Trump is one of the worst presidents we've ever had for not forcing the regime change St Hillary promised, putting the good, democratic rebels in charge of Syria.' (Note that those 'democratic rebels' are al-Qaeda and the ISL.) And there it's sat for a year. But now Trump's cabinet and Trump (and the UK and France) have said they will not allow Russia to attack Idlib. After Trump said he would send the US military if Russia bombed Idlib, the jihadis immediately tweeted to Western reporters that Russia started bombing yesterday. Russia neither confirmed nor denied the bombing.
Yesterday was, of course, Labor Day, so the US was off, including most newspaper reporters. But today, everyone is back at work, the Russian bombing is starting to make the news as a fact (after all, al-Qaeda and the ISL cannot tell a lie, since their religion prohibits lying, plus the US and UK are paying them, and US and UK employees never lie), and all the establishment media are starting to scream. And so ...
Friday, August 31, 2018
War as a Distraction, but Where?
On 21 August 2018, Trump's lawyer Cohen pleaded guilty to 8 counts, some of which were criminal conspiracy with 'a candidate for president'. Of course, we know which 'candidate for president', making a certain president an unindicted co-conspirator. The Democrats are saying it's the beginning of the end, the impeachment clock is ticking down. As it happens, Alan Dershowitz says that Cohen's confessions do not implicate Trump, while David Jolly says Trump is finished.
It is an old American tradition that, when a president is in trouble, he starts a war to distract the voters and tells them it would endanger the troops to change Commander-in-Chief in the middle of a war. But where? Trump was promising regime change in Iran back in '15, but his Cabinet wants regime change in Syria, Russia, and the DPRK. Iran is screaming 'Mother of all Wars' just like Saddam did, and war with Iran should go like Libya, but might be more like Iraq, whichever way Trump thinks will best distract the voters. Obama was going to win anyway, so a quick victory in Libya worked (and made a lot of money for the US/UK/France), but Bush, sr was not so popular, and, after he finished the First US-Iraq War, the voters said, 'Job well done, but it's done, and now we want Clinton.' So Bush, jr kept the Second US-Iraq War going (and it's still going 9 years after Bush, jr left office).
Candidate Obama said he'd end all the wars, and President Obama did pause the Iraq War briefly, but mostly, President Obama expanded all the wars he inherited, and added some new ones. Candidate Trump ran on ending the wars, but President Trump expanded the ones he inherited, and is in a corner where he needs one or more new ones.
Iran can scream, but they can't do much. Carpet bombing like Libya should force regime change about as quickly as it did in Libya, but ground troops like Iraq might be a better distraction for the voters, so Trump cold go either way.
However, Trump's Cabinet, France and the UK all want regime change in Syria, which means also in Russia, and the Cabinet would also like to finish what Truman started in the DPRK. Truman, of course, fired his general for suggesting he risk a nuclear war against the only other nuclear power in the world, and one would hope Trump and his Cabinet would learn from Truman, but Trump and his cabinet don't seem capable of learning anything from anyone (and nor do the British and French governments). So they might try Russia and/or the DPRK. Russia might not be as strong as the USSR, but they still have MAD (the New York Times says Russia's MAD WMD are just Photoshop, but they now print whatever their readers want to be true, not necessarily the facts). China did not sit idly by when Truman tried regime change in the DPRK, and they're not going to sit idly by if Trump and his Cabinet try again, not to mention that the DPRK is almost certainly able to execute an EMP strike on the US all by itself.
If the Cabinet, Britain and France convince Trump to start a war anywhere except Iran, it'll be, 'So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, goodbye.'
It is an old American tradition that, when a president is in trouble, he starts a war to distract the voters and tells them it would endanger the troops to change Commander-in-Chief in the middle of a war. But where? Trump was promising regime change in Iran back in '15, but his Cabinet wants regime change in Syria, Russia, and the DPRK. Iran is screaming 'Mother of all Wars' just like Saddam did, and war with Iran should go like Libya, but might be more like Iraq, whichever way Trump thinks will best distract the voters. Obama was going to win anyway, so a quick victory in Libya worked (and made a lot of money for the US/UK/France), but Bush, sr was not so popular, and, after he finished the First US-Iraq War, the voters said, 'Job well done, but it's done, and now we want Clinton.' So Bush, jr kept the Second US-Iraq War going (and it's still going 9 years after Bush, jr left office).
Candidate Obama said he'd end all the wars, and President Obama did pause the Iraq War briefly, but mostly, President Obama expanded all the wars he inherited, and added some new ones. Candidate Trump ran on ending the wars, but President Trump expanded the ones he inherited, and is in a corner where he needs one or more new ones.
Iran can scream, but they can't do much. Carpet bombing like Libya should force regime change about as quickly as it did in Libya, but ground troops like Iraq might be a better distraction for the voters, so Trump cold go either way.
However, Trump's Cabinet, France and the UK all want regime change in Syria, which means also in Russia, and the Cabinet would also like to finish what Truman started in the DPRK. Truman, of course, fired his general for suggesting he risk a nuclear war against the only other nuclear power in the world, and one would hope Trump and his Cabinet would learn from Truman, but Trump and his cabinet don't seem capable of learning anything from anyone (and nor do the British and French governments). So they might try Russia and/or the DPRK. Russia might not be as strong as the USSR, but they still have MAD (the New York Times says Russia's MAD WMD are just Photoshop, but they now print whatever their readers want to be true, not necessarily the facts). China did not sit idly by when Truman tried regime change in the DPRK, and they're not going to sit idly by if Trump and his Cabinet try again, not to mention that the DPRK is almost certainly able to execute an EMP strike on the US all by itself.
If the Cabinet, Britain and France convince Trump to start a war anywhere except Iran, it'll be, 'So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, goodbye.'
Thursday, August 16, 2018
John Perkins and Financial Theory
Suppose you have $200,000 and a bank says it will loan 80% at 10% interest. Further suppose you have an investment that will pay 20%. How much should you borrow from the bank? The textbook answer is, of course, $800,000. You'll pay $80,000 a year in interest, but your investment will pay $200,000 a year. The correct answer is $0. John Perkins job was to convince people to borrow money by promising a 20% return. The banks insisted the money go to the contractors they specified, contractors who built nothing, but who took the $1,000,000, after which, the borrowers had a debt of $800,000 and no way to repay, so the banks foreclosed and got all the assets the borrowers had. With kickbacks from the contractors, the banks got all the borrowers' assets for almost nothing.
Perkins said he did this to Indonesia. After the IMF and World Bank foreclosed, Indonesia had to let mining companies dump toxins in the rivers, so people died. They had to let companies take farms from subsistence farmers to use for cash crops, so people died. Saudi Imams said (quite correctly) that the infidels had killed Muslims, and said (incorrectly) that everyone working in the New York World Trade Center was guilty. Which is why the 9/11 hijackers destroyed the New York World Trade Center. Yes, people were guilty, but the 9/11 hijackers killed few, if any, of the guilty parties, and a lot of people who were completely innocent of the crimes for which they were murdered.
Not clear how to punish the guilty. Perkins said he had no idea who they were, he got his orders (and payment) via a carefully camouflaged trail that hid those ultimately responsible.
So Justice seems unlikely for this world.
Perkins said he did this to Indonesia. After the IMF and World Bank foreclosed, Indonesia had to let mining companies dump toxins in the rivers, so people died. They had to let companies take farms from subsistence farmers to use for cash crops, so people died. Saudi Imams said (quite correctly) that the infidels had killed Muslims, and said (incorrectly) that everyone working in the New York World Trade Center was guilty. Which is why the 9/11 hijackers destroyed the New York World Trade Center. Yes, people were guilty, but the 9/11 hijackers killed few, if any, of the guilty parties, and a lot of people who were completely innocent of the crimes for which they were murdered.
Not clear how to punish the guilty. Perkins said he had no idea who they were, he got his orders (and payment) via a carefully camouflaged trail that hid those ultimately responsible.
So Justice seems unlikely for this world.
Saturday, August 4, 2018
Eurasia, Eastasia, and the Ministry of Truth
I read 1984 back in the '60s. Airstrip 1 went back and forth from an ally of Eurasia at war with Eastasia to an ally of Eastasia at war with Eurasia to an ally of ..., and every time they switched, the Ministry of Truth had to fix all the history books and newspaper morgues. If Airstrip 1 was at war with Eurasia and allied with Eastasia, they had always been at war with Eurasia and allied with Eastasia. Only, in the '60s, Eurasia was obviously the USSR, and Eastasia was obviously the PRC, and both were allied against Airstrip 1. It took me 50 years to figure out 1984. Eurasia was the Central Powers of WWI, Germany, Austria, and the Ottoman Empire. Eastasia was Russia/USSR. In the Crimean War, Airstrip 1 allied with France and the Ottomans against Russia. Then in WWI, Airstrip 1 was allied with Russia against the Central Powers. Then, after WWI, Airstrip 1 allied with Hitler against Stalin's USSR. Then, after '41, Airstrip 1 allied with Stalin's USSR against the Axis. Then, after '47, Airstrip 1 allied with West Germany against Stalin's USSR. And every time Airstrip 1 changed it's alliance, it tried to change the history books.
But, after 1939, the Airstrip 1 of 1984 was a neo-colony of the US. After WWI, the US went isolationist, and then came the Great Depression in 1930, with 25% unemployment, and nothing tried by a Republican president, Hoover, or a Democrat president, FDR, had any effect. Finally, two brilliant applied economists named Adolph and Tojo formed the Axis and quickly reduced US unemployment from more than 25% to less than 2%. US history books (incorrectly) blamed the Great Depression on WWI, and correctly credited the Axis with its cure. The collapse of the Axis was predicted to cause a quick return to a situation where only 25% unemployment would be considered practically full employment, and quite unachievable. What to do? Then, in '47, Truman said the USSR was a greater threat than the Axis! The US Congress voted to keep the military mobilised, not disbanded. They voted for the Marshall Plan, chits for Europe they could use to buy American products, food (since their agricultural sector had been badly damaged) and tools for reconstruction, chits that Americans (and only Americans) could cash in for dollars. Truman won re-election (after being so far behind in the polls he'd been written off by the experts). And the Republicans jumped on Truman's bandwagon (even though Truman was a Democrat). The Republicans found USSR spies everywhere. The head of the FBI spoke of card-carrying Communists, dupes, and fellow-travelers. (It annoys me that Hoover's terminology that I had to learn in school has been changed from 'dupes' to 'useful idiots'; why abandon what worked so well for so long?) No Depression, instead the US enjoyed great prosperity.
Then, in 1990, the USSR collapsed. The fact that the USSR had MAD meant the US was limited in what it could do. But now, the US could absorb the Warsaw Pact into NATO. It could destroy Yugoslavia, and the USSR wasn't around to stop it. It could even absorb chunks of the USSR into NATO, and Russia was powerless. After Yugoslavia came Iraq, and the 100 hour war. Then sanctions that killed maybe half a million Iraqis. And Russia had no say. Then came 9/11, and Islam was the new and improved threat, a replacement for the USSR. War in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and lots of other places to keep the US economy from falling back into a Great Depression.
But, in spring 2013, the presidents of the US and France and the UK PM all agreed to force regime change in Syria. For some reason, the UK PM asked Parliament to vote, and they voted 'NO!' And then Putin stepped in and offered to remove all of Syria's WMD, and regime change was left to the Free Syrian Army, whom the Israelis said would quickly achieve victory without the necessity of a major US campaign. By Fall 2013, Russia was back, and would no longer allow regime change in Syria and let its only Mediterranean Naval Base go to NATO.
So the US has moved Russia back to the #1 threat to world peace. Russia has always been the #1 threat to world peace. And US newspapers assure us Russia no longer has MAD. All the Soviet WMD are gone, thanks to the decade when Russia was ruled by a good democratic president installed by the CIA, Yeltsin. Putin's presentation of Russian WMD was just Photoshop. St Hillary promised regime change in Russia starting on Day 1, but Russia stole the election, an atrocity worse than Pearl Harbor. All the US media want immediate regime change in Russia.
Trump ran on a platform of peace with Syria and Russia. The US media, Democrat and Republican, all agree that makes him a traitor. The Democrats say the stolen election should be returned to it's rightful winner, St Hillary. The Republicans say Trump must reform, or be replaced by Pence. So Trump is making some waffling anti-Russian comments.
The world is closer to annihilation than it's ever been. The Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes to midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
But, after 1939, the Airstrip 1 of 1984 was a neo-colony of the US. After WWI, the US went isolationist, and then came the Great Depression in 1930, with 25% unemployment, and nothing tried by a Republican president, Hoover, or a Democrat president, FDR, had any effect. Finally, two brilliant applied economists named Adolph and Tojo formed the Axis and quickly reduced US unemployment from more than 25% to less than 2%. US history books (incorrectly) blamed the Great Depression on WWI, and correctly credited the Axis with its cure. The collapse of the Axis was predicted to cause a quick return to a situation where only 25% unemployment would be considered practically full employment, and quite unachievable. What to do? Then, in '47, Truman said the USSR was a greater threat than the Axis! The US Congress voted to keep the military mobilised, not disbanded. They voted for the Marshall Plan, chits for Europe they could use to buy American products, food (since their agricultural sector had been badly damaged) and tools for reconstruction, chits that Americans (and only Americans) could cash in for dollars. Truman won re-election (after being so far behind in the polls he'd been written off by the experts). And the Republicans jumped on Truman's bandwagon (even though Truman was a Democrat). The Republicans found USSR spies everywhere. The head of the FBI spoke of card-carrying Communists, dupes, and fellow-travelers. (It annoys me that Hoover's terminology that I had to learn in school has been changed from 'dupes' to 'useful idiots'; why abandon what worked so well for so long?) No Depression, instead the US enjoyed great prosperity.
Then, in 1990, the USSR collapsed. The fact that the USSR had MAD meant the US was limited in what it could do. But now, the US could absorb the Warsaw Pact into NATO. It could destroy Yugoslavia, and the USSR wasn't around to stop it. It could even absorb chunks of the USSR into NATO, and Russia was powerless. After Yugoslavia came Iraq, and the 100 hour war. Then sanctions that killed maybe half a million Iraqis. And Russia had no say. Then came 9/11, and Islam was the new and improved threat, a replacement for the USSR. War in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and lots of other places to keep the US economy from falling back into a Great Depression.
But, in spring 2013, the presidents of the US and France and the UK PM all agreed to force regime change in Syria. For some reason, the UK PM asked Parliament to vote, and they voted 'NO!' And then Putin stepped in and offered to remove all of Syria's WMD, and regime change was left to the Free Syrian Army, whom the Israelis said would quickly achieve victory without the necessity of a major US campaign. By Fall 2013, Russia was back, and would no longer allow regime change in Syria and let its only Mediterranean Naval Base go to NATO.
So the US has moved Russia back to the #1 threat to world peace. Russia has always been the #1 threat to world peace. And US newspapers assure us Russia no longer has MAD. All the Soviet WMD are gone, thanks to the decade when Russia was ruled by a good democratic president installed by the CIA, Yeltsin. Putin's presentation of Russian WMD was just Photoshop. St Hillary promised regime change in Russia starting on Day 1, but Russia stole the election, an atrocity worse than Pearl Harbor. All the US media want immediate regime change in Russia.
Trump ran on a platform of peace with Syria and Russia. The US media, Democrat and Republican, all agree that makes him a traitor. The Democrats say the stolen election should be returned to it's rightful winner, St Hillary. The Republicans say Trump must reform, or be replaced by Pence. So Trump is making some waffling anti-Russian comments.
The world is closer to annihilation than it's ever been. The Concerned Scientists say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes to midnight. Pollyannas, those Concerned Scientists.
Friday, August 3, 2018
Evil genius or idiot?
The US establishment media all write that Trump is a Russian agent, an evil genius who is working to destroy the US. The Persian press think Trump is an idiot. He ordered sanctions on Iran (not that Obama ever lifted them: everyone is still warned that it's a violation of US law to do any US dollar transactions with Iran, and Iran is still cut off from the international banking system, so one must bring at least $10,000 in cash if one wants to visit Iran).
Trump added new sanctions on Iran that meant that most EU companies have announced that they have halted all trade with Iran because of the threat that they will be blocked from all trade with the US if they do not. The EU said it's sticking to the JCPOA, but EU companies can't afford to be cut off from the US market: the EU market isn't enough to balance their books without the US market.
China would probably have been forced to join the rest of the world and cut Iran off, forcing Iran back to the 17th century, but Trump has already banned most Chinese products from the US, so China announced that it will be buying most of the oil it needs from Iran, and will sell Iran all that they need. And, given that China is China, that greatly mitigates the US sanctions on Iran, to the point where Iran won't feel much damage from Trump's new sanctions!
Trump added new sanctions on Iran that meant that most EU companies have announced that they have halted all trade with Iran because of the threat that they will be blocked from all trade with the US if they do not. The EU said it's sticking to the JCPOA, but EU companies can't afford to be cut off from the US market: the EU market isn't enough to balance their books without the US market.
China would probably have been forced to join the rest of the world and cut Iran off, forcing Iran back to the 17th century, but Trump has already banned most Chinese products from the US, so China announced that it will be buying most of the oil it needs from Iran, and will sell Iran all that they need. And, given that China is China, that greatly mitigates the US sanctions on Iran, to the point where Iran won't feel much damage from Trump's new sanctions!
Monday, July 30, 2018
Mid-terms
Many are sure the Congress will go solid Blue in '19 after the Democrats sweep the mid-terms. But it's actually not at all clear what will happen. The Democrats are fairly certain to get more votes, just as they did in the 2016 election, but whether those votes will turn into a majority of seats in the Congress is not at all clear. The good Republicans Mr Gerry Mander and Mr James Corvus will do their best to hand the Congress over to the Republicans, even if most of the voters disagree with them. It's not clear how much Mr Gerry Mander and Mr James Corvus will be able to do, and we won't know until 7 Nov this year. The best source is Five Thirty Eight, but so far, they're only predicting that the Democrats are going to win the most votes, they haven't started on seats, yet (but they will as we get closer to the election).
Friday, June 29, 2018
Poker or Bridge?
Trump seems to think he's playing poker with a royal flush in clubs. Only he might be playing bridge, and getting outbid in spades.
Trump thinks the US is an indispensable trading partner to every other nation. So, if he threatens to stop all trade, they have to cave and agree to whatever Trump demands. He might be right. Again, he's playing as if he has a royal flush, but a) it's not clear he's playing poker, and even if he is, b) it's not clear he knows what his hole card is.
The Western media reports massive riots in Iran, that the government is very close to toppling. The official US version, developed by Bush, jr, is that Iran was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and no Saudi was involved at all. Bush, jr said the Ayatollahs ordered the 9/11 attacks, and they were perpetrated by their co-religionists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the DPRK. Bush, jr later said he'd missed 3: the 9/11 hijackers also included co-religionists of the Ayatollahs from Libya, Syria, and Cuba. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya down, Iran, the DPRK, Syria, and Cuba to go.
Clinton promised Saddam lots of investment and sanctions relief for getting rid of all his WMD with inspectors. Saddam fell for it. Bush, jr made the same promise to Muammar, and he also fell for it. Iraq and Libya were 'liberated' and Saddam and Muammar were lynched. Obama made the same promise to Iran, but got a UN Security Council resolution and an agreement of the P5+1 and Iran, an agreement President Hillary would have said Iran was violating (and everyone would have jumped on board) or just forced regime change without bothering to abrogate. But all the media say Trump is only abrogating the agreement because Obama made it (they never said anything about Bush, jr abrogating Clinton's agreement with Saddam, or Obama abrogating Bush, jr's agreement with Muammar, and they would have strongly supported President Clinton's abrogation of the agreement with Iran).
The western media are now saying that Trump's sanctions against Iran are working, and regime change from an internal revolution is imminent; however, eastern media have no reports of any riots in Iran, and China says it will buy Iranian oil disirregardless. If China has to give up all trade with the US in exchange for Iranian oil, it says it will do so. Will China back down? And, with the new US tariffs, China wants to rebuild the Silk Road, with high speed rail connecting all of Eurasia, so Shanghai silks can ship to Cherbourg in less than 24 hours. India has been an enemy of China since the end of the British Empire in '47, but now India is on board the Chinese Silk Road, since it can't see that it has any other choice. And an interconnected Eurasia can get by without the US.
So is Trump getting the US back to the halcyon days of the 19th century when it had very limited trade with the rest of the world? I guess we'll find out.
Trump thinks the US is an indispensable trading partner to every other nation. So, if he threatens to stop all trade, they have to cave and agree to whatever Trump demands. He might be right. Again, he's playing as if he has a royal flush, but a) it's not clear he's playing poker, and even if he is, b) it's not clear he knows what his hole card is.
The Western media reports massive riots in Iran, that the government is very close to toppling. The official US version, developed by Bush, jr, is that Iran was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and no Saudi was involved at all. Bush, jr said the Ayatollahs ordered the 9/11 attacks, and they were perpetrated by their co-religionists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the DPRK. Bush, jr later said he'd missed 3: the 9/11 hijackers also included co-religionists of the Ayatollahs from Libya, Syria, and Cuba. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya down, Iran, the DPRK, Syria, and Cuba to go.
Clinton promised Saddam lots of investment and sanctions relief for getting rid of all his WMD with inspectors. Saddam fell for it. Bush, jr made the same promise to Muammar, and he also fell for it. Iraq and Libya were 'liberated' and Saddam and Muammar were lynched. Obama made the same promise to Iran, but got a UN Security Council resolution and an agreement of the P5+1 and Iran, an agreement President Hillary would have said Iran was violating (and everyone would have jumped on board) or just forced regime change without bothering to abrogate. But all the media say Trump is only abrogating the agreement because Obama made it (they never said anything about Bush, jr abrogating Clinton's agreement with Saddam, or Obama abrogating Bush, jr's agreement with Muammar, and they would have strongly supported President Clinton's abrogation of the agreement with Iran).
The western media are now saying that Trump's sanctions against Iran are working, and regime change from an internal revolution is imminent; however, eastern media have no reports of any riots in Iran, and China says it will buy Iranian oil disirregardless. If China has to give up all trade with the US in exchange for Iranian oil, it says it will do so. Will China back down? And, with the new US tariffs, China wants to rebuild the Silk Road, with high speed rail connecting all of Eurasia, so Shanghai silks can ship to Cherbourg in less than 24 hours. India has been an enemy of China since the end of the British Empire in '47, but now India is on board the Chinese Silk Road, since it can't see that it has any other choice. And an interconnected Eurasia can get by without the US.
So is Trump getting the US back to the halcyon days of the 19th century when it had very limited trade with the rest of the world? I guess we'll find out.
Monday, June 25, 2018
Trump, the media, and MAD
Every president since Truman wanted a unified Korea, Parked with US military bases all along the Yalu River. Truman would have gotten one, but the PRC and the USSR made it cost more than the US could afford. Every president since Truman tried to convince the DPRK that the US meant no harm, so, if they'd disarm, the US would grant great benefits. All lies, of course, and neither Kim's grandfather, nor father, nor Kim are as gullible as Saddam or Muammar, who agreed to disarm with inspections in exchange for sanctions relief and help developing. Of course, the US presidents all lied, and Saddam and Muammar had their nations 'liberated' and themselves lynched. Clinton promised Kim's grandfather and father lots of money for development if they'd allow inspectors. Kim's father agreed. Clinton had lied, and gave not 1¢, and Bush, jr put the DPRK on the Axis of Evil, responsible for 9/11, and scheduled for regime change. A few days later, Kim's father set off what he said was a nuke. He lied! He said he'd given up all his nukes, and allowed inspectors who'd all been lied to. What could be worse? A terrible dictator who lies! Regime change had to be put on hold for the DPRK, but went ahead in Iraq and Libya, and is now scheduled for Iran. But it's still far too expensive for the US to try regime change in the DPRK.
The US media says Trump was a fool. He agreed to stop the military exercises. Korea impeached Park, a hawk, and elected Moon, who called Kim about peace talks, and Kim sent some athletes to be part of the united Korea team, met with Moon, and scheduled a 2nd meeting. But then military exercises started, and Kim was a no-show. No cancellation, just a no-show when Moon was waiting. It was only after the exercises ended that Kim met Moon (again) and then Trump.
When Kim promised to destroy all his nuke testing facilities, the western media all said: 'They were already destroyed by the last test. He's not destroying anything.' Lots of reporters were allowed into the DPRK as observers. They looked in, saw what looked like a testing facility (but they weren't experts), and saw the facility destroyed. 'All faked,' according to the western media, Kim got Trump to stop working for rapid regime change, which is Trump's #1 job, and destroyed nothing. Trump needs to get back to work. The DPRK can only destroy the RoK, and all the US assets there are a cheap price to pay to keep the US safe. Or so say all the western corporate media.
Kim has proven he has nukes (and, for those who know nuclear physics, he probably has hundreds), and ICBMs that can reach the eastern US. So, if the US tries regime change, Kim can do enough damage to destroy the US economy. He can't totally obliterate the US, leaving the whole place depopulated, but it doesn't take nearly that much for MAD, just enough to completely disrupt the economy. Kim could manage an EMP strike that erases every single bank record, leaving not a trace of any US money inside the US, and also fry all the electric distribution networks, leaving everyone with no electricity at all. That's enough for MAD. The US response would leave absolutely nothing of the Korean peninsula, so Kim would only start MAD if the US shows it's determined to force regime change and make all of Korea a US neo-colony.
But the western media says Kim has just a few nukes, and no way to get any of them to the US (obviously false premises) so Kim does not have MAD. Actually, it's at least a 75% chance that he does.
Of course, when Putin did his demo that Russia still has MAD, the western media said it was all Photoshop. After the evil dictator Gorbachev was replaced by the good, free, democratic leader Yeltsin, the USSR military and industry and education and healthcare were all destroyed, as well they should have been, and Russia could not challenge the US. But in late '13, Putin said Russia was not giving up its bases in Syria. The US has been trying to overthrow the evil Syrian regime that's letting Russians squat on NATO military bases, but Trump is falling down on the job. If only we'd elected St Hillary who promised regime change in Syria and Russia on Day 1, Putin would have known he'd have to step down since no one can face off St Hillary, so he stole the election (with help from Trump). Evidence? No need. Ss Obama and Hillary said so, and they cannot tell a lie, so their word is irrefutable proof, and is clearly justification for regime change in Russia. After all, all the Obamabots have for their creed: 'Obama said it, I believe it, and that settles it.'
And every cockroach strongly supports Ss Obama and Hillary, since the US trying regime change in Russia will leave all us cockroaches safe from being stepped on.
The US media says Trump was a fool. He agreed to stop the military exercises. Korea impeached Park, a hawk, and elected Moon, who called Kim about peace talks, and Kim sent some athletes to be part of the united Korea team, met with Moon, and scheduled a 2nd meeting. But then military exercises started, and Kim was a no-show. No cancellation, just a no-show when Moon was waiting. It was only after the exercises ended that Kim met Moon (again) and then Trump.
When Kim promised to destroy all his nuke testing facilities, the western media all said: 'They were already destroyed by the last test. He's not destroying anything.' Lots of reporters were allowed into the DPRK as observers. They looked in, saw what looked like a testing facility (but they weren't experts), and saw the facility destroyed. 'All faked,' according to the western media, Kim got Trump to stop working for rapid regime change, which is Trump's #1 job, and destroyed nothing. Trump needs to get back to work. The DPRK can only destroy the RoK, and all the US assets there are a cheap price to pay to keep the US safe. Or so say all the western corporate media.
Kim has proven he has nukes (and, for those who know nuclear physics, he probably has hundreds), and ICBMs that can reach the eastern US. So, if the US tries regime change, Kim can do enough damage to destroy the US economy. He can't totally obliterate the US, leaving the whole place depopulated, but it doesn't take nearly that much for MAD, just enough to completely disrupt the economy. Kim could manage an EMP strike that erases every single bank record, leaving not a trace of any US money inside the US, and also fry all the electric distribution networks, leaving everyone with no electricity at all. That's enough for MAD. The US response would leave absolutely nothing of the Korean peninsula, so Kim would only start MAD if the US shows it's determined to force regime change and make all of Korea a US neo-colony.
But the western media says Kim has just a few nukes, and no way to get any of them to the US (obviously false premises) so Kim does not have MAD. Actually, it's at least a 75% chance that he does.
Of course, when Putin did his demo that Russia still has MAD, the western media said it was all Photoshop. After the evil dictator Gorbachev was replaced by the good, free, democratic leader Yeltsin, the USSR military and industry and education and healthcare were all destroyed, as well they should have been, and Russia could not challenge the US. But in late '13, Putin said Russia was not giving up its bases in Syria. The US has been trying to overthrow the evil Syrian regime that's letting Russians squat on NATO military bases, but Trump is falling down on the job. If only we'd elected St Hillary who promised regime change in Syria and Russia on Day 1, Putin would have known he'd have to step down since no one can face off St Hillary, so he stole the election (with help from Trump). Evidence? No need. Ss Obama and Hillary said so, and they cannot tell a lie, so their word is irrefutable proof, and is clearly justification for regime change in Russia. After all, all the Obamabots have for their creed: 'Obama said it, I believe it, and that settles it.'
And every cockroach strongly supports Ss Obama and Hillary, since the US trying regime change in Russia will leave all us cockroaches safe from being stepped on.
Friday, June 1, 2018
Trumped
I have problems with the Obamabots and Clintonbots who say St Obama was the Greatest President the US has Ever Had, and St Hillary would have been better, while Trump is the absolute Worst President Ever. I also have problems with the Trumpeters who say Trump is one of the best presidents the US has ever had, and Obama was the worst. Both were terrible. Obama talked a good game about keeping the water safe, while allowing it to be full of lead. Trump says he's getting rid of all those job-killing regulations that stop mining companies from dumping their waste into the drinking water. Either way, the water in many US cities was unsafe. At least with Trump, he admits it?
It's hard to evaluate policies until one sees results. Trump threatened China with heavy tariffs and had banned the licensing of Android to one Chinese smart phone maker, putting them out of business. After talks, Trump unbanned the licensing of Android, and said no new tariffs on China. China had joined the WTO as an under-developed nation, allowed high tariffs so it could build up its industries. China no longer deserves those high tariffs and should play on a level field, and the Chinese agreed: they said they'd slash their tariffs and guarantee an increase of $hundreds of billions a year in US imports. A huge victory for Trump.
Then the New York Times screamed, 'Trump is giving valuable secrets to a Communist dictatorship and putting the US in danger.' I didn't think Trump read the New York Times, but the day after that article came out, he announced that he was banning the licensing of Android, which means only the US can make any smart phones (the New York Times wanted Trump to allow Android to be licensed to all the US allies: the UK, EU/ RoK, and Japan).
And Trump is putting heavy tariffs not just on China, but on the UK, EU, Canada, and Mexico. So China responded in kind. New, high tariffs on US imports. And the UK, EU, Canada and Mexico are also planning retaliation. Senators Smoot and Hawley are smiling.
And yet...
As I said, one cannot evaluate policies until one sees results. Will US manufacturing return to the days when more than half of Americans had good paying jobs in factories? Or will the US find itself back in the '30s? I'll wait before I say that Trump turned a major victory into a colossal mess. I have a guess now, but I've learned that it's always foolish to make any predictions with respect to the future (predictions about the past are OK, though).
It's hard to evaluate policies until one sees results. Trump threatened China with heavy tariffs and had banned the licensing of Android to one Chinese smart phone maker, putting them out of business. After talks, Trump unbanned the licensing of Android, and said no new tariffs on China. China had joined the WTO as an under-developed nation, allowed high tariffs so it could build up its industries. China no longer deserves those high tariffs and should play on a level field, and the Chinese agreed: they said they'd slash their tariffs and guarantee an increase of $hundreds of billions a year in US imports. A huge victory for Trump.
Then the New York Times screamed, 'Trump is giving valuable secrets to a Communist dictatorship and putting the US in danger.' I didn't think Trump read the New York Times, but the day after that article came out, he announced that he was banning the licensing of Android, which means only the US can make any smart phones (the New York Times wanted Trump to allow Android to be licensed to all the US allies: the UK, EU/ RoK, and Japan).
And Trump is putting heavy tariffs not just on China, but on the UK, EU, Canada, and Mexico. So China responded in kind. New, high tariffs on US imports. And the UK, EU, Canada and Mexico are also planning retaliation. Senators Smoot and Hawley are smiling.
And yet...
As I said, one cannot evaluate policies until one sees results. Will US manufacturing return to the days when more than half of Americans had good paying jobs in factories? Or will the US find itself back in the '30s? I'll wait before I say that Trump turned a major victory into a colossal mess. I have a guess now, but I've learned that it's always foolish to make any predictions with respect to the future (predictions about the past are OK, though).
Friday, May 25, 2018
Back in the, back in the DPRK
It looked like Trump was actually going to accomplish something useful. Kim told Moon he'd be willing to denuclearise the entire Korean peninsula. Then Bolton and Pence and then Trump promised Kim the 'Libyan option'. The official Trump version was that Libya refused to give up its nukes, so the US forced regime removal, and the only way Kim can avoid regime removal is to immediately give up all his nukes, with inspections. Trump seems to think Kim is as stupid and gullible as Saddam and Muammar. Pity he's not.
Trump still wants regime change in Iran, which (they think) is still safe enough: no WMDs, no MAD unless the Friends of Iran decide to do something (if Iran has any Friends that are that close). A Libyan-style regime removal in Iran seems possible, with little cost to the US, and big benefits for Trump from his Friends on the other side of the Gulf with Two Names.
Trump is probably just being Trump and making idle threats against the DPRK. The US media say Kim can only destroy all US assets in the RoK, and are split: some say, 'Nuke now, the RoK is a cheap price to pay to get rid of the DPRK,' while others say, 'The US has too much invested in the RoK that would be destroyed, so learn to live with the DPRK for now, and keep trying that Libyan option.'
If the US starts to force regime change, Kim has said he won't waste a single one of his many nukes on the RoK, he plans to deploy every last one in the US. No reason to think he can't. He has an ICBM that can reach the eastern US, so a Warday strike would be easy. The DPRK smuggled nerve agent into Malaysia, so smugglers might bring in many bombs and set them off in major cities. The US can completely obliterate the DPRK, but the DPRK has MAD, so they can do enough damage that the US won't be much of a world power after the war is over. Not to mention that nuking the DPRK will annoy the PRC and Russia no end. Trump's best approach to the DPRK is to just continue to bluster, something he enjoys doing on a daily basis.
The DPRK isn't insane enough to start anything, but it will do its best to finish any attempt at regime change by the US.
Trump still wants regime change in Iran, which (they think) is still safe enough: no WMDs, no MAD unless the Friends of Iran decide to do something (if Iran has any Friends that are that close). A Libyan-style regime removal in Iran seems possible, with little cost to the US, and big benefits for Trump from his Friends on the other side of the Gulf with Two Names.
Trump is probably just being Trump and making idle threats against the DPRK. The US media say Kim can only destroy all US assets in the RoK, and are split: some say, 'Nuke now, the RoK is a cheap price to pay to get rid of the DPRK,' while others say, 'The US has too much invested in the RoK that would be destroyed, so learn to live with the DPRK for now, and keep trying that Libyan option.'
If the US starts to force regime change, Kim has said he won't waste a single one of his many nukes on the RoK, he plans to deploy every last one in the US. No reason to think he can't. He has an ICBM that can reach the eastern US, so a Warday strike would be easy. The DPRK smuggled nerve agent into Malaysia, so smugglers might bring in many bombs and set them off in major cities. The US can completely obliterate the DPRK, but the DPRK has MAD, so they can do enough damage that the US won't be much of a world power after the war is over. Not to mention that nuking the DPRK will annoy the PRC and Russia no end. Trump's best approach to the DPRK is to just continue to bluster, something he enjoys doing on a daily basis.
The DPRK isn't insane enough to start anything, but it will do its best to finish any attempt at regime change by the US.
Wednesday, May 2, 2018
Next after the DPRK
Kim continued what his father started. His father announced he'd tested a nuke (seismic evidence inconclusive). Maybe he had, maybe it was fake. But Kim tested what were definitely nukes, and also launched one ICBM that could have reached the east coast of the US. A lot in the US said, 'He doesn't have a working ICBM yet, so we need to nuke him now to keep the US safe. He'll retaliate by obliterating all of South Korea, but that's a small price to pay.' Of course, Kim has subs and smugglers who might have gotten a lot of nukes into the US. Or he might have an EMP device (read War Day). But then the RoK impeached Park and got Moon, who wanted peace. Then Xi called Kim to Beijing for a Headmaster to student chat, after which Kim announced he was completely finished with testing, and the RoK said he'd told them he'd give up all his nukes. Then Kim and Moon met and signed a treaty to completely denuclearise the entire peninsula, beginning this week. Wow! Moon says Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.
***
The US MSM says Trump must be removed ASAP for colluding with Russia to steal the election from St Hillary. And Russia is guilty of a crime worse than the sinking of the Maine, or Saddam's attack on the US on 9/11 and his planned attack with nuclear weapons that was stopped just in the nick of time (and most Americans 'know' the Spanish sank the Maine and Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and had nukes pointed at the US with fuses lit, fuses the US military snuffed out just in the nick of time; let us not confuse American history with the fact that the old steam engines often exploded and sank ships, or that Saddam had NEW WMD which only the most clever and patriotic can see; to keep things simple, we have 3 'obvious' casus belli).
The US MSM says Russia is about as powerful and Panama was in '89, relative to the US military of 2018, which has gotten immensely stronger since '89, while Russia's military has collapsed, so regime removal in Russia should be a top priority of the US, and Trump isn't doing anything because he's Putin's puppet. Putin did a slide show about Russia's new WMD that guarantee MAD, and the US MSM said they were all Photoshopped. The MSM promise that when the US threatens, Putin, having nothing, will meekly resign. So those Concerned Scientists who say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes before midnight are a bunch of Pollyannas.
***
The next war Trump plans is, of course, Iran. In '15, General Flynn said regime change in Iran would be a top priority of the Trump administration. But the last two presidents waited until their 3rd year in office for a big regime removal, so '19 seems like the most likely year, unless the MSM and Bibi put enough pressure on Trump that he moves the war up a year. Bush, jr, Obama, and Trump all agree: the 9/11 attack was ordered by the Ayatollahs of Iran, and perpetrated by their co-religionists, Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, North Koreans, and Cubans. And who could question Bush, jr, Obama, and Trump? Since all 3 agree, it must be factual! The US Congress voted to investigate if anyone from Saudi Arabia might have had anything to do with 9/11, and Obama naturally vetoed such a ridiculous bill.
And Iran definitely doesn't have any nukes it could use, so the war should be safe for the US, and that's the most important thing. That, and the profits.
***
But the US MSM doesn't want the administration (preferably excised of Trump) distracted by Iran from forcing the regime change in Russia that's a much higher priority for them.
***
The US MSM says Trump must be removed ASAP for colluding with Russia to steal the election from St Hillary. And Russia is guilty of a crime worse than the sinking of the Maine, or Saddam's attack on the US on 9/11 and his planned attack with nuclear weapons that was stopped just in the nick of time (and most Americans 'know' the Spanish sank the Maine and Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and had nukes pointed at the US with fuses lit, fuses the US military snuffed out just in the nick of time; let us not confuse American history with the fact that the old steam engines often exploded and sank ships, or that Saddam had NEW WMD which only the most clever and patriotic can see; to keep things simple, we have 3 'obvious' casus belli).
The US MSM says Russia is about as powerful and Panama was in '89, relative to the US military of 2018, which has gotten immensely stronger since '89, while Russia's military has collapsed, so regime removal in Russia should be a top priority of the US, and Trump isn't doing anything because he's Putin's puppet. Putin did a slide show about Russia's new WMD that guarantee MAD, and the US MSM said they were all Photoshopped. The MSM promise that when the US threatens, Putin, having nothing, will meekly resign. So those Concerned Scientists who say the Doomsday Clock is 2 minutes before midnight are a bunch of Pollyannas.
***
The next war Trump plans is, of course, Iran. In '15, General Flynn said regime change in Iran would be a top priority of the Trump administration. But the last two presidents waited until their 3rd year in office for a big regime removal, so '19 seems like the most likely year, unless the MSM and Bibi put enough pressure on Trump that he moves the war up a year. Bush, jr, Obama, and Trump all agree: the 9/11 attack was ordered by the Ayatollahs of Iran, and perpetrated by their co-religionists, Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, North Koreans, and Cubans. And who could question Bush, jr, Obama, and Trump? Since all 3 agree, it must be factual! The US Congress voted to investigate if anyone from Saudi Arabia might have had anything to do with 9/11, and Obama naturally vetoed such a ridiculous bill.
And Iran definitely doesn't have any nukes it could use, so the war should be safe for the US, and that's the most important thing. That, and the profits.
***
But the US MSM doesn't want the administration (preferably excised of Trump) distracted by Iran from forcing the regime change in Russia that's a much higher priority for them.
Monday, April 16, 2018
Top Secret Phone Call
'Hello, Don.'
'Privet, Vlad. We have to talk. You know May and Macron are facing dark and story nights, and I'm facing a dark and Stormy night, so we absolutely have to bomb Syria, we have no choice. You don't have to worry about elections, so I'm asking you to let us. You said you'd shoot down all the planes launching the missiles, and then I'd have to respond, and then you'd have to respond, and who knows where it might end up going?'
'OK. Take down these coordinates.' [redacted] 'Got them?'
'Yes, Vlad, I'm recording the call.'
'Good. You may shoot at all of them on Saturday, 14 April, at 5 am Moscow time, that will be 8 pm your time, so you'll be able to go on prime time TV and say you've destroyed the Syrian poison gas production facilities. If one of your planes shoots anywhere else, or any other time, we'll shoot it down. Understand?'
'Perfectly.'
'I'll feign outrage, and say you destroyed a bunch of peaceful chemical research facilities, and your people will say I'm lying (as I will be) and that's proof they were illegal poison gas facilities, and that must be the end of it. OK?'
'Deal. Spasiba, Vlad.'
'Do svidania, Don.'
'Privet, Vlad. We have to talk. You know May and Macron are facing dark and story nights, and I'm facing a dark and Stormy night, so we absolutely have to bomb Syria, we have no choice. You don't have to worry about elections, so I'm asking you to let us. You said you'd shoot down all the planes launching the missiles, and then I'd have to respond, and then you'd have to respond, and who knows where it might end up going?'
'OK. Take down these coordinates.' [redacted] 'Got them?'
'Yes, Vlad, I'm recording the call.'
'Good. You may shoot at all of them on Saturday, 14 April, at 5 am Moscow time, that will be 8 pm your time, so you'll be able to go on prime time TV and say you've destroyed the Syrian poison gas production facilities. If one of your planes shoots anywhere else, or any other time, we'll shoot it down. Understand?'
'Perfectly.'
'I'll feign outrage, and say you destroyed a bunch of peaceful chemical research facilities, and your people will say I'm lying (as I will be) and that's proof they were illegal poison gas facilities, and that must be the end of it. OK?'
'Deal. Spasiba, Vlad.'
'Do svidania, Don.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)