Mearsheimer On Trump's Dilemma (Part 1)
Today will be a mental health and grampa day, so I need to make an early start.
Yesterday we presented the case that Trump 2.0—the attempted imperial fiscal reboot that would maintain Anglo-Zionist hegemony—has already reached an impasse. We bolstered that case with some of Doug Macgregor’s observations, spurred by the nutso US/UK attack on Russian airbases. Since this is such an important big picture topic, we’ll continue today with John Mearsheimer’s views, as expressed in his conversation yesterday with Danny Davis (partial transcript only). That will be in Part 2.
A caveat. Missing from the transcript are the remarks on the harm that the tariff shock and awe is doing to relations with our “allies”. Mearsheimer, in my view, tends to view geopolitics in too narrow a way, concentrating on military dynamics. The notion that vassal states of the Anglo-Zionist Empire are “allies” that America needs in order to face down China—Mearsheimer’s bugaboo—seems somewhat naive to me. Nevertheless, as usual, Mearsheimer offers plenty of value, as well as support for my thesis.
We’ll start with some news snippets that play into our thesis, and especially regarding the looming fiscal crisis of the Anglo-Zionist Empire.
To place this first bit from Axios in context—and I have found the liberal Axios to be generally quite reliable and well sourced—let me recount a comment from susan mullen:
Re: US view of "Russia and China," Bill O'Reilly spoke of his recent trip to China on behalf of Pres. Trump. I happened to be listening to Rita Cosby's talk show on WABC radio (in NY but available on the internet) two or 3 nights ago, O'Reilly called in. (O'Reilly also has a talk show on WABC radio from 9-10P, M-F.) O'Reilly said he and his son (age 21 I believe) traveled to China to meet w. top officials to pass along Trump's views which were that if China stopped supporting Russia, helped to isolate it from the world, this would please Trump and possibly gain a Nobel Peace Prize for both China and Trump. Very sick. (I'm not a fan of O'Reilly or Rita who are both Deep Establishment, I occasionally check in to see what they're saying. They're both beloved by WABC radio owner, John Catsimatidis).
OMG. Now Axios:
Megatron @Megatron_ron
NEW:
 Trump thought Ukraine's attack on the Russian bombers was "strong" and "badass" - Axios
Trump thought Ukraine's drone attack on the Russian bombers over the weekend was "strong" and "badass," but he is concerned it will make his ceasefire mission harder - Axios reports
I’m afraid this reflects the same extreme shallowness that the O’Reilly conte also exhibits. Not to say, well, … By the way, this also confirms what I keep saying: Trump is NOT seeking peace in the normal sense of the word. He’s only seeking a ceasefire that can be turned to the advantage of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. It’s the Trumpian version of the Biden “frozen conflict”, superficially rebranded. Nobody should be fooled by the rhetoric—I’m sure Putin isn’t.
China is considering starting to replace Boeing orders with European Airbus - Bloomberg
US vetoes UN Security Council Resolution calling for Gaza CEASEFIRE and unhindered aid access
This long Tucker Carlson tweet has a direct bearing on what Mearsheimer will have to say. Note how Carlson slyly avoids any mention of Israel, Zionism, or Jewish Nationalism:
Tucker Carlson @TuckerCarlson
Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and likeminded ideologues in Washington are now arguing. They’re just weeks away.
If this sounds familiar, it's because the same people have been making the same claim since at least the 1990s. It’s a lie. In fact, there is zero credible intelligence that suggests Iran is anywhere near building a bomb, or has plans to. None. Anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant or dishonest. If the US government knew Iran was weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, we’d be at war already.
…
So why is Mark Levin once again hyperventilating about weapons of mass destruction? To distract you from the real goal, which is regime change — young Americans heading back to the Middle East to topple yet another government. Virtually no one will say this out loud. America’s record of overthrowing foreign leaders is so embarrassingly counterproductive that regime change has become a synonym for disaster. Officially, no one supports it. So instead of telling the truth about their motives, they manufacture hysteria: “A country like Iran can never have the bomb! They’ll nuke Los Angeles! We have to act now!”
They don’t really mean this, and you can tell they don’t by what they omit. At least two of Iran’s neighbors — both Islamic nations — already have nuclear weapons. That fact should scare the hell out of Mark Levin. Yet for some reason he never mentions it. How come? Because it’s not the weapons he hates. It’s the ideology of the Iranian government, which is why he’s lobbying to overthrow it.
It goes without saying that there are very few Trump voters who’d support a regime change war in Iran. Donald Trump has argued loudly against reckless lunacy like this. Trump ran for president as a peace candidate. That’s what made him different from conventional Republicans. It’s why he won. A war with Iran would amount to a profound betrayal of his supporters. It would end his presidency. That may explain why so many of Trump’s enemies are advocating for it.
And then there’s the question of the war itself. Iran may not have nukes, but it has a fearsome arsenal of ballistic missiles, many of which are aimed at US military installations in the Gulf, as well as at our allies and at critical energy infrastructure. The first week of a war with Iran could easily kill thousands of Americans. It could also collapse our economy, as surging oil prices trigger unmanageable inflation. Consider the effects of $30 gasoline.
But the second week of the war could be even worse. Iran isn’t Iraq or Libya, or even North Korea. While it’s often described as a rogue state, Iran has powerful allies. It’s now part of a global bloc called BRICS, which represents the majority of the world’s landmass, population, economy and military power. Iran has extensive military ties with Russia. It sells the overwhelming majority of its oil exports to China. Iran isn’t alone. An attack on Iran could very easily become a world war. We’d lose.
None of these are far fetched predictions. Most of them comport with the Pentagon’s own estimates: many Americans would die during a war with Iran. People like Mark Levin don’t seem to care about this. It’s not relevant to them. Instead they insist that Iran give up all uranium enrichment, regardless of its purpose. They know perfectly well that Iran will never accept that demand. They’ll fight first. And of course that’s the whole point of pushing for it: to box the Trump administration into a regime change war in Iran.
The one thing that people like Mark Levin don’t want is a peaceful solution to the problem of Iran, despite the obvious benefits to the United States. They denounce anyone who advocates for a deal as a traitor and a bigot. They tell us with a straight face that Long Island native Steve Witkoff is a secret tool of Islamic monarchies. They’ll say or do whatever it takes. They have no limits. These are scary people. Pray that Donald Trump ignores them.
john milbank @johnmilbank3
‘The liberal worldview has no place within it for children — they do not conform to the liberal desire to make every relationship reducible to a contract’ (@philippilk, Philip Pilkington, from The Collapse of Global Liberalism, 290-1.)
Philip Pilkington @philippilk
Trading White House press announcements hard? Have you tried MASSIVELY INCREASING YOUR LEVERAGE? 
Hedgies are just the first of the Wall Street gang to die from the violent end of USD hegemony
Philip Pilkington @philippilk
Inflation is coming. And if you thought USD was in trouble with Treasuries yielding 4%+ wait until you see what it looks like when they yield 6%+! USD foreign lending will be a relic of the past. How long until the US is forced to adopt capital controls?
It’s true. The BBB contains “soft capital controls”. US ten year interest rates around 2.7% higher than Chinese and 1.9% higher than German. With such uncompetitive rates, the US will be strongly incentivised for multiple reasons to pursue incremental capital controls.
Quote
Eric Hendriks @HendrKim
Aha! Observers had wondered when the US would try capital controls, as they are more effective than tariffs in reducing trade deficits by weakening the dollar (but would also diminish Wall Street’s centrality). Here we go. “Soft capital controls” are in the Big Beautiful Bill.
? Pakistan, but who’s the second?
There are rumors Saudi Arabia has a relation to borrow Pakistan Nukes.
Turkey does not have them, but the U.S. has some based in Turkey supposedly.
India has nukes and a large Islamic population.
“ At least two of Iran’s neighbors — both Islamic nations — already have nuclear weapons. “
Disturbing display of angry rhetoric from Trump and Elon today.
I'm leery of the "Big Beautiful Bill."
As I've said before, "The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican. The only thing worse than a Republican is a Democrat."