Does Trump really need a deal? If he did would already have one? We should take him and Israel at their word. He does not care about the midterms. He has never cared about any election other than his own. He cares about legacy and he does not need a deal for him to create narratives about that. The Republicans are resigned to losing in ‘26. All those that defend Trump will do so regardless: he was the kid with the thumb in the dyke and no one stepped up.
Also, interesting to see talking heads and writers promoting that Trump is following a plan to destroy Globalism, including knowing that Iran would go after the bases and the GCC countries, and that Russia, China and Iran are in some way in cahoots on this.
People with links to the admin and me professionally claim this: he is going after the bad guys and has a lot of unofficial support globally for this.
This may have some basis: Trump is a tree shaker not a destroyer. He wants to be seen by the powers that be as the savior: I can do what you want better than you can, just give me the opportunity.
Welcome to the DIGITAL Paradigm where you don’t know the narratives without a scorecard…;)
Looks like the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Strategic Patriot Reserve will run out simultaneously. Paraphrasing the old Charlie Munger axiom, Iran can stay irrational longer than the US can remain solvent.
I don't get Gromen's explanation. IMU, a huge amount of Japanese investment in UST and stocks is funded with carry-trade, a borrowing at near 0% in Japan, and buying USTs, stocks, Bitcoin, whatever they think will appreciate.
This leads to panic selling whenever the value of whatever was speculated on is dropping and approaches the amount that was originally borrowed. Same story as leveraged trading.
Yeah, I think the main concern is that the BOJ might sell its UST holdings to raise Dollars to buy Yen. However, the Japanese government (think pension plans), private companies (including insurers and their annuities), and retail investors all have significant investments in the U.S. stock and bond markets. In an effort to support Japanese bonds and markets they might well sell those assets and repatriate the Dollar proceeds to buy Japanese domestic stock and bonds. Especially if the yields on Japanese government bonds continue to rise.
The carry trade is kind of a separate issue as that has been leveraged mainly by foreign investors rather than Japanese ones.
It's not just carry trade. Japan has invested over $800Bn in '25, and is the largest foreign investor. They've usually got a noticeable trade surplus, but since domestic investment didn't yield anything, money flows to the US markets (equity, real estate, businesses, debt etc).
What Gromen describes is the theory that Japan is going to start repatriation of those investments, since the Petrodollar system in the face of a prolonged Iran war and supply shortages on imports have accelerated their currency issues.
Bessent is already pushing to let them "pawn" treasuries for dollar liquidity, but in the end, it's always about spread and real yields. Japan needs to offload their debt more broadly. Of course, this would be negative US markets, not a good time.
Gromen also maintains the thesis that Japan will shoulder the US reindustrialisaton, since they're the only one left who's able to do it (US has lost too much know-how and basics) and isn't China.
Even with interceptors available, a good proportion of the Iranian missiles and drones were getting through. I don’t believe Ted Postol’s single digit interception rates but I wouldn’t be surprised if the interceptors are less than 50% effective, even when firing multiple interceptors for every incoming missile. The math doesn’t work, particularly when you consider we are Incapable of producing more interceptors to keep up with the demand.
Iran is not a conquering nation. To my knowledge, they have no colonies, no regime-changes underway. They have proxies, yes, that defend and protect homelands: Hezbolah-Lebanon, Ansar Allah (Houthis)-Yemen, Hamas-Palestine. If Iran crushed Israel, who would take over governance of that land? Would the Israel citizens flee to other countries, or stay put to make their own, new non-warring country?
I agree about eradicating the current venomous Israel government--am just wondering what would follow.
Maybe Iran does not want to destroy Israel out of fear that de-housed Jews will flee to Iran.
-->. Israelis are colonizing numerous places in the world, displaying a sense of entitlement that is upsetting to the natives who have deep connections to the land
-->The review of the Clifton-Lustick book, Israel's Lobby, begins with mention of Truman's approval of Israeli statehood at UN. The matter was hotly debated in Republican and Democrat political circles.
In Foreign Policy and Party Politics, H Bradford Westerfield devoted more than a full chapter to discussion of the "Palestine" question, opening with reflection on the advantages "zealous and well-funded zionists" had in advocating for American endorsement of the Israeli state.
Westerfield noted: "They were virtually unopposed by any other pressure group and faced an indifferent or mildly sympathetic public. Anti-Semites, e.g., preferred to have the remnant of European Jewry go to Palestine than come to New York."
--> Ron Unz makes frequent reference to two books, 'Iron Curtain over America,' by John Beaty, and 'The Jewish Threat,' by Joseph Bendersky; at opposite ends of the argument. Beaty was harshly critical of Jewish influence in the war in Europe; and Bendersky painstakingly catalogued the many military personnel who were similarly critical of Jews in the same context.
The video of Israelis colonizing beautiful places all over the world - taking them over with no respect, is very scary. These are people who are dangerous to world peace.
"These are people who are dangerous to world peace."
I agree and they have demonstrated their menace repeatedly especially since the emergence of Zionism. I have expressed this concern to some of my good friends within my Greek Orthodox community and many are aghast by my view. Of course many fit the FNC-Boomer profile or being immigrants they are proud to be American and will defend our country and the Holohoax.
Not too long ago, via a combination of reading biography of Rabbi Stephen Wise + listening/reading Ilan Pappé, I learned that what 'Europeans' objected to (in late 19th and 20th century) was not "Jews-in-toto" but Eastern European Jews in particular.
Assimilated American Jews (who were mostly Spain/Portugal to Netherlands to Germany to New York City); assimilated German Jews, and assimilated British & other central European Jews shared this antipathy.
In the linked video, Pappé says that Herzl assured central European heads of state that "Palestine was for Eastern European Jews," (EEJ) to which Arthur Balfour expressed: 'thank god they won't be coming to Britain.'
Stephen Wise's biography referred to a Polish minister of some level who sought help in taking in Poland's "3 million surplus Jews." There were no takers. Wise expressed disgust that, despite his efforts, US Congress would not help.
"Prejudice against the Jews, he said, was due to their tendency toward movements of a communistic nature, and to the fact that nearly fifty percent of the government officails [sic] have been Jews, although the total Jewish population was only one percent....
"He asserted that limitation of Jewish influence in Germany was being conducted with the greatest possible consideration toward the old native Jewish families who, he said; had proven themselves good Germans and indicated that it was directed against the Eastern European Jews who had overflooded the country since the War. "
I have since tried to isolate what it was that was/is so problematic about EEJs.
This report on Israeli TV24 bemoaned the emigration of the professional class.
The thought occurred that the Jews remaining in Israel, and certainly those like Smotrich, Gvir, and fundamentalists such as described by Lustick in the "For the Land and the Lord" doc, https://www.sas.upenn.edu/penncip/lustick/ were those most likely to remain in Israel, and continue to wreak holy havoc.
That is, the crazies.
First thing I think about re EEJs is that in the late-19th and early 20th century, EEJs reproduced at an alarming rate. At the same time, EEJs were just inching into the secular world, having spent many, many years being educated in solely Hebrew scripture. Heinrich Graetz produced his 7-volume History of the Jews (in his native German) in that time period & observed with displeasure that Polish Jews spent their time in sophistic and arrogant disputation; very few Polish Jews spoke in Polish or "assimilated" into Polish culture. etc etc etc
In short, "it's complicated." I'm not sure how useful it is to try to unravel the ball of string, but it keeps me off the streets.
Does Trump really need a deal? If he did would already have one? We should take him and Israel at their word. He does not care about the midterms. He has never cared about any election other than his own. He cares about legacy and he does not need a deal for him to create narratives about that. The Republicans are resigned to losing in ‘26. All those that defend Trump will do so regardless: he was the kid with the thumb in the dyke and no one stepped up.
Also, interesting to see talking heads and writers promoting that Trump is following a plan to destroy Globalism, including knowing that Iran would go after the bases and the GCC countries, and that Russia, China and Iran are in some way in cahoots on this.
People with links to the admin and me professionally claim this: he is going after the bad guys and has a lot of unofficial support globally for this.
This may have some basis: Trump is a tree shaker not a destroyer. He wants to be seen by the powers that be as the savior: I can do what you want better than you can, just give me the opportunity.
Welcome to the DIGITAL Paradigm where you don’t know the narratives without a scorecard…;)
I agree with all your points in this post.
Looks like the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Strategic Patriot Reserve will run out simultaneously. Paraphrasing the old Charlie Munger axiom, Iran can stay irrational longer than the US can remain solvent.
I don't get Gromen's explanation. IMU, a huge amount of Japanese investment in UST and stocks is funded with carry-trade, a borrowing at near 0% in Japan, and buying USTs, stocks, Bitcoin, whatever they think will appreciate.
This leads to panic selling whenever the value of whatever was speculated on is dropping and approaches the amount that was originally borrowed. Same story as leveraged trading.
Yeah, I think the main concern is that the BOJ might sell its UST holdings to raise Dollars to buy Yen. However, the Japanese government (think pension plans), private companies (including insurers and their annuities), and retail investors all have significant investments in the U.S. stock and bond markets. In an effort to support Japanese bonds and markets they might well sell those assets and repatriate the Dollar proceeds to buy Japanese domestic stock and bonds. Especially if the yields on Japanese government bonds continue to rise.
The carry trade is kind of a separate issue as that has been leveraged mainly by foreign investors rather than Japanese ones.
What you said 😂
Same! Thanks
It's not just carry trade. Japan has invested over $800Bn in '25, and is the largest foreign investor. They've usually got a noticeable trade surplus, but since domestic investment didn't yield anything, money flows to the US markets (equity, real estate, businesses, debt etc).
See https://www.jetro.go.jp/usa/japan-us-investment-report/ for a breakdown.
What Gromen describes is the theory that Japan is going to start repatriation of those investments, since the Petrodollar system in the face of a prolonged Iran war and supply shortages on imports have accelerated their currency issues.
Bessent is already pushing to let them "pawn" treasuries for dollar liquidity, but in the end, it's always about spread and real yields. Japan needs to offload their debt more broadly. Of course, this would be negative US markets, not a good time.
Gromen also maintains the thesis that Japan will shoulder the US reindustrialisaton, since they're the only one left who's able to do it (US has lost too much know-how and basics) and isn't China.
Even with interceptors available, a good proportion of the Iranian missiles and drones were getting through. I don’t believe Ted Postol’s single digit interception rates but I wouldn’t be surprised if the interceptors are less than 50% effective, even when firing multiple interceptors for every incoming missile. The math doesn’t work, particularly when you consider we are Incapable of producing more interceptors to keep up with the demand.
Yes......and No. It is a real concern, and Israel is doing a great job of self destructing without
having to do anything. A little patience is needed at this point.
Iran is not a conquering nation. To my knowledge, they have no colonies, no regime-changes underway. They have proxies, yes, that defend and protect homelands: Hezbolah-Lebanon, Ansar Allah (Houthis)-Yemen, Hamas-Palestine. If Iran crushed Israel, who would take over governance of that land? Would the Israel citizens flee to other countries, or stay put to make their own, new non-warring country?
I agree about eradicating the current venomous Israel government--am just wondering what would follow.
Maybe Iran does not want to destroy Israel out of fear that de-housed Jews will flee to Iran.
-->. Israelis are colonizing numerous places in the world, displaying a sense of entitlement that is upsetting to the natives who have deep connections to the land
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yq_fWXKidhk
-->The review of the Clifton-Lustick book, Israel's Lobby, begins with mention of Truman's approval of Israeli statehood at UN. The matter was hotly debated in Republican and Democrat political circles.
In Foreign Policy and Party Politics, H Bradford Westerfield devoted more than a full chapter to discussion of the "Palestine" question, opening with reflection on the advantages "zealous and well-funded zionists" had in advocating for American endorsement of the Israeli state.
Westerfield noted: "They were virtually unopposed by any other pressure group and faced an indifferent or mildly sympathetic public. Anti-Semites, e.g., preferred to have the remnant of European Jewry go to Palestine than come to New York."
--> Ron Unz makes frequent reference to two books, 'Iron Curtain over America,' by John Beaty, and 'The Jewish Threat,' by Joseph Bendersky; at opposite ends of the argument. Beaty was harshly critical of Jewish influence in the war in Europe; and Bendersky painstakingly catalogued the many military personnel who were similarly critical of Jews in the same context.
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-a-dozen-unknown-books-and-the-world-war-ii-history-they-reveal/
The point is that even during and after the war in Europe, many peoples, Americans among them, were wary of Jewish influence.
The video of Israelis colonizing beautiful places all over the world - taking them over with no respect, is very scary. These are people who are dangerous to world peace.
"These are people who are dangerous to world peace."
I agree and they have demonstrated their menace repeatedly especially since the emergence of Zionism. I have expressed this concern to some of my good friends within my Greek Orthodox community and many are aghast by my view. Of course many fit the FNC-Boomer profile or being immigrants they are proud to be American and will defend our country and the Holohoax.
Not too long ago, via a combination of reading biography of Rabbi Stephen Wise + listening/reading Ilan Pappé, I learned that what 'Europeans' objected to (in late 19th and 20th century) was not "Jews-in-toto" but Eastern European Jews in particular.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1Iw2fm58FY
Assimilated American Jews (who were mostly Spain/Portugal to Netherlands to Germany to New York City); assimilated German Jews, and assimilated British & other central European Jews shared this antipathy.
In the linked video, Pappé says that Herzl assured central European heads of state that "Palestine was for Eastern European Jews," (EEJ) to which Arthur Balfour expressed: 'thank god they won't be coming to Britain.'
Stephen Wise's biography referred to a Polish minister of some level who sought help in taking in Poland's "3 million surplus Jews." There were no takers. Wise expressed disgust that, despite his efforts, US Congress would not help.
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) records that in ~May 1933, German ambassador to US Hans Luther was challenged to explain 'German anti-semitism.' https://www.jta.org/archive/dr-hans-luther-refuses-to-answer-queries-on-arrival-on-bremen-as-hitlers-u-s-envoy. [page 3, right col.]
Luther:
"Prejudice against the Jews, he said, was due to their tendency toward movements of a communistic nature, and to the fact that nearly fifty percent of the government officails [sic] have been Jews, although the total Jewish population was only one percent....
"He asserted that limitation of Jewish influence in Germany was being conducted with the greatest possible consideration toward the old native Jewish families who, he said; had proven themselves good Germans and indicated that it was directed against the Eastern European Jews who had overflooded the country since the War. "
I have since tried to isolate what it was that was/is so problematic about EEJs.
This report on Israeli TV24 bemoaned the emigration of the professional class.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSWj9F6ot34
The thought occurred that the Jews remaining in Israel, and certainly those like Smotrich, Gvir, and fundamentalists such as described by Lustick in the "For the Land and the Lord" doc, https://www.sas.upenn.edu/penncip/lustick/ were those most likely to remain in Israel, and continue to wreak holy havoc.
That is, the crazies.
First thing I think about re EEJs is that in the late-19th and early 20th century, EEJs reproduced at an alarming rate. At the same time, EEJs were just inching into the secular world, having spent many, many years being educated in solely Hebrew scripture. Heinrich Graetz produced his 7-volume History of the Jews (in his native German) in that time period & observed with displeasure that Polish Jews spent their time in sophistic and arrogant disputation; very few Polish Jews spoke in Polish or "assimilated" into Polish culture. etc etc etc
In short, "it's complicated." I'm not sure how useful it is to try to unravel the ball of string, but it keeps me off the streets.
Israel will be country #110
dude, I abide!
I've read many of his articles on these subjects and others.