"Obviously, informed comments are welcome", should preclude me from speaking, but it won't. I'm not informed; I'm going on my gut.
I like what Trump is doing. Great countries make things. They don't hollow out their industrial base and devastate their middle class. They don't enrich the privileged few, the noblesse oblige.
It's disgusting what the Dems and Reps have done, treating illegal immigrants better than middle-class whites and blacks. They've undermined our right to speak, to worship as we see fit, to be left alone and succeeded in ruining many young people with trans and DEI demonic beliefs.
Trump is by no means perfect, but that man has his finger on the pulse of the nation's anxieties and aspirations.
Since Russia and China have Iran's backing... to secure the JCPOA (hopefully w/no end date this time) and secure backing of the the 3 H's, isn't Trump using tariff's and sanctions relief on China/Russia as a hedge? like, we'll reduce tariff's China if you can commit to ensure Iran doesn't provide military/funding support to the 3 H's?
Perhaps we are talking past each other. I was referring to the JCPOA's constraints on fissile material production and the verification and enforcement provisions of the JCPOA, which were scheduled to expire over 10 - 15 years. To me, this would have opened the door for Iran to pursue nuclear weapons. Thus, my questioning LJ's assessment of a sound agreement.
That article actually notes that Iran was a signatory to the NPT, so *no door was opened* to nukes by the JCPOA. Iran renounced any nuclear weapon program in 2003 and all intel assessments to the present assess that it has no nukes. Re enrichment, Iran adhered strictly to the levels dictated in the JCPOA--until Trump unilaterally exited the JCPOA, imposed "maximum pressure" sanctions on Iran in violation of that agreement, and supported terrorist attacks on Iran in conjunction with Israel. That alarmed Iran and caused it to seek to become a threshold country.
Unlike Iran, Israel refuses to sign the NPT and, in fact, in the past has assisted rogue regimes (South Africa). Israel refuses to engage in disarmament negotiations with other ME countries until they adopt Israel-defined "peaceful relations" with Israel. But at the same time Israel continues to engage in ethnic cleansing and illegal confiscation of Palestinian lands--which is the basis for opposition to Israel in the region.
Here’s another idea: the tariffs are a “reverse Marshall Plan!” C@C’s post today:
“It’s totally new and wildly unprecedented. It’s like the Marshall Plan in reverse, except with the whole world, not just Western Europe. Trump is monetizing American hegemony. The globalists built a one-way grocery aisle of dependency — and Trump put a cash register at the end of the aisle. And now the whole world is waiting in line.”
Mark, I received a Simplicious post on this topic. I do not have a paid subscription (I've been putting it off) so I was unable to RTWT, but it's interesting in that he goes after the gnashing of teeth by the globalists through the Rothchild publication "The Economist."
"Caesar-like rebirth, chemotherapy for globalism, or just Perestroika for the End of History?"
The Economist assures us that "Trade benefits consumers and importing industries."
Importing... industries? This covers Amazon vendors and Amazon delivery drivers, the Port of Long Beach, and trucking companies and the companies that build and sell zero-emissions trucks to meet California ARB standards? Walmart; Costco?
"this ‘prosperous’ world order which has led to an entire ‘lost generation’ drowned in inflationary malaise, cultural decay, and an economic death spiral. It becomes clear that establishmentarians only care about party dogma, no matter how clunkily it tangles with logic and objective reality."
So much stuff going on with Trump, it's mentally exhausting to follow.
I'll stick with three major issues:
- Ukraine
_ Gaza / Israel / Iran / Yemen
- Tariffs
The Tarrif is a huge club, and Trump's goal is to increase US jobs. And just the fact of the uncertainty this created, will result is more factories moving to the US. Companies do not like uncertainty, and Trump showed any President can destroy US imports from any country. The safest strategy is make in the US, to remove this uncertainty. I have also read this is a huge hit on the financial arbitrage that is used to make money, basically a financial economy, which benefits the super rich, but that is beyond my current understanding. We will see what results Trump gets. China has a much weaker hand than the US for negotiations on the trade area. And the negotiations are going beyond just tariffs, to include other trade barriers. And perhaps Trump will use this as an excuse to bring back US troops from overseas.
Yemen, I have no idea what the goal is, or how effective the US attacks have been, much less how well targeted they have been. I don't understand how Israel's economy is still standing and in pretty good shape, there must be hidden support I don't see, or lots of economic statistic lies. I'm not sure how much of an influence Iran has on Gaza. Turkey and Syria make this even messier. Perhaps Trump will get a deal with Iran, and Yemen quiets down. So Israel and Gaza can destroy each other. If an Iran deal is reached, this would help the world economy a lot. Iran I have read has some demographic and corruption issues, but with so many lies, I am not sure what is true. Russia after sanctions were imposed seems to be doing better economically.
Ukraine - I just see Russia imposing their will through facts on the ground. I see lots of talk, but I don't a peace deal. But, you never know. The horse may learn to sing.
Nima Alkhorshid hosted L Wilkerson, Chas Freeman and Trita Parsi, (Iranian origin; author of Treacherous Alliance; now at Quincy Institute). The trio 'recharacterized' the interrelationships of Iran with China & Russia: neither will rush to Iran's aid; they do not have 'defense pacts;' China is not as economically interested as frequently assumed: Wilkerson said "93% of China's oil comes from Russia" -- not Iran. The strategy sessions Iran engaged w/ China & Moscow were more likely a demonstration, "We have friends; we share advice & strategy" rather than war-planning.
Consensus of panelists was that "indirect talks first" in order to get the lay of the land. Since parties are traveling to Oman (when 'indirect talks' could have been held by phone rather than in separate rooms w/ Oman as mediator), it is likely that direct talks will take place after an initial doggy-sniffing exercise.
The trio of guests agreed with Parsi's suggestion that Iran has decided, and will pursue, proposition that invitation to USA to establish corporate relationships with Iran = the best security that any agreement will outlast an administration; will provide 'comfort' to Europeans that investment in Iran is not insecure; will ensure that US will abide by the agreements it makes (US never did abide by terms of JCPOA, even before Trump rescinded it). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY0uJH-z2To
"Obviously, informed comments are welcome", should preclude me from speaking, but it won't. I'm not informed; I'm going on my gut.
I like what Trump is doing. Great countries make things. They don't hollow out their industrial base and devastate their middle class. They don't enrich the privileged few, the noblesse oblige.
It's disgusting what the Dems and Reps have done, treating illegal immigrants better than middle-class whites and blacks. They've undermined our right to speak, to worship as we see fit, to be left alone and succeeded in ruining many young people with trans and DEI demonic beliefs.
Trump is by no means perfect, but that man has his finger on the pulse of the nation's anxieties and aspirations.
Since Russia and China have Iran's backing... to secure the JCPOA (hopefully w/no end date this time) and secure backing of the the 3 H's, isn't Trump using tariff's and sanctions relief on China/Russia as a hedge? like, we'll reduce tariff's China if you can commit to ensure Iran doesn't provide military/funding support to the 3 H's?
So much covered in this one post, thanks Mark.
Tariffs, a normally boring, staid and ho hum subject, now its "so hot right now" talked about by everyone.
"The original JCPOA was a sound agreement and met Donald Trump’s demand for an end to Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program."
I couldn't concentrate on the rest of the article after reading the above - by LJ, I believe.
Isn't this the agreement that would have allowed Iran to pursue nuclear weapons in 2025, this year?!
I really enjoy, and constantly continue learning, by reading this substack and the comments.
Thanks.
No, that's flatly untrue.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-10/features/rethinking-us-nuclear-diplomacy-iran-2025
Perhaps we are talking past each other. I was referring to the JCPOA's constraints on fissile material production and the verification and enforcement provisions of the JCPOA, which were scheduled to expire over 10 - 15 years. To me, this would have opened the door for Iran to pursue nuclear weapons. Thus, my questioning LJ's assessment of a sound agreement.
https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/iran-nuclear-deal-definitive-guide
That article actually notes that Iran was a signatory to the NPT, so *no door was opened* to nukes by the JCPOA. Iran renounced any nuclear weapon program in 2003 and all intel assessments to the present assess that it has no nukes. Re enrichment, Iran adhered strictly to the levels dictated in the JCPOA--until Trump unilaterally exited the JCPOA, imposed "maximum pressure" sanctions on Iran in violation of that agreement, and supported terrorist attacks on Iran in conjunction with Israel. That alarmed Iran and caused it to seek to become a threshold country.
Unlike Iran, Israel refuses to sign the NPT and, in fact, in the past has assisted rogue regimes (South Africa). Israel refuses to engage in disarmament negotiations with other ME countries until they adopt Israel-defined "peaceful relations" with Israel. But at the same time Israel continues to engage in ethnic cleansing and illegal confiscation of Palestinian lands--which is the basis for opposition to Israel in the region.
I recommend you go back and read LJ's article.
Here’s another idea: the tariffs are a “reverse Marshall Plan!” C@C’s post today:
“It’s totally new and wildly unprecedented. It’s like the Marshall Plan in reverse, except with the whole world, not just Western Europe. Trump is monetizing American hegemony. The globalists built a one-way grocery aisle of dependency — and Trump put a cash register at the end of the aisle. And now the whole world is waiting in line.”
Kinda fascinating.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/the-art-of-the-global-deal-wednesday
Dow up 2500? Say what?
There may be an explanation. New post coming.
Thanks for trying to keep up! Your columns are always appreciated.
Thanks, Jeff. This is really difficult stuff. I'm just trying to understand the alternative narratives.
Mark, I received a Simplicious post on this topic. I do not have a paid subscription (I've been putting it off) so I was unable to RTWT, but it's interesting in that he goes after the gnashing of teeth by the globalists through the Rothchild publication "The Economist."
"Caesar-like rebirth, chemotherapy for globalism, or just Perestroika for the End of History?"
Simplicius: https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/maga-stroika-heralds-new-age?publication_id=1351274&post_id=158073732&isFreemail=true&r=8t0x5&triedRedirect=true
He puts the blame where it should be on bankers and globalists.
The Economist assures us that "Trade benefits consumers and importing industries."
Importing... industries? This covers Amazon vendors and Amazon delivery drivers, the Port of Long Beach, and trucking companies and the companies that build and sell zero-emissions trucks to meet California ARB standards? Walmart; Costco?
"this ‘prosperous’ world order which has led to an entire ‘lost generation’ drowned in inflationary malaise, cultural decay, and an economic death spiral. It becomes clear that establishmentarians only care about party dogma, no matter how clunkily it tangles with logic and objective reality."
Wow, just wow! This is pretty much spot on!
So much stuff going on with Trump, it's mentally exhausting to follow.
I'll stick with three major issues:
- Ukraine
_ Gaza / Israel / Iran / Yemen
- Tariffs
The Tarrif is a huge club, and Trump's goal is to increase US jobs. And just the fact of the uncertainty this created, will result is more factories moving to the US. Companies do not like uncertainty, and Trump showed any President can destroy US imports from any country. The safest strategy is make in the US, to remove this uncertainty. I have also read this is a huge hit on the financial arbitrage that is used to make money, basically a financial economy, which benefits the super rich, but that is beyond my current understanding. We will see what results Trump gets. China has a much weaker hand than the US for negotiations on the trade area. And the negotiations are going beyond just tariffs, to include other trade barriers. And perhaps Trump will use this as an excuse to bring back US troops from overseas.
Yemen, I have no idea what the goal is, or how effective the US attacks have been, much less how well targeted they have been. I don't understand how Israel's economy is still standing and in pretty good shape, there must be hidden support I don't see, or lots of economic statistic lies. I'm not sure how much of an influence Iran has on Gaza. Turkey and Syria make this even messier. Perhaps Trump will get a deal with Iran, and Yemen quiets down. So Israel and Gaza can destroy each other. If an Iran deal is reached, this would help the world economy a lot. Iran I have read has some demographic and corruption issues, but with so many lies, I am not sure what is true. Russia after sanctions were imposed seems to be doing better economically.
Ukraine - I just see Russia imposing their will through facts on the ground. I see lots of talk, but I don't a peace deal. But, you never know. The horse may learn to sing.
Nima Alkhorshid hosted L Wilkerson, Chas Freeman and Trita Parsi, (Iranian origin; author of Treacherous Alliance; now at Quincy Institute). The trio 'recharacterized' the interrelationships of Iran with China & Russia: neither will rush to Iran's aid; they do not have 'defense pacts;' China is not as economically interested as frequently assumed: Wilkerson said "93% of China's oil comes from Russia" -- not Iran. The strategy sessions Iran engaged w/ China & Moscow were more likely a demonstration, "We have friends; we share advice & strategy" rather than war-planning.
Consensus of panelists was that "indirect talks first" in order to get the lay of the land. Since parties are traveling to Oman (when 'indirect talks' could have been held by phone rather than in separate rooms w/ Oman as mediator), it is likely that direct talks will take place after an initial doggy-sniffing exercise.
The trio of guests agreed with Parsi's suggestion that Iran has decided, and will pursue, proposition that invitation to USA to establish corporate relationships with Iran = the best security that any agreement will outlast an administration; will provide 'comfort' to Europeans that investment in Iran is not insecure; will ensure that US will abide by the agreements it makes (US never did abide by terms of JCPOA, even before Trump rescinded it). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY0uJH-z2To