China has long said, and believes, that the US took up for the Brits, vis a vie China, after WWII. Who has rattled the saber the most regarding China? The Five Eyes members…not a coincidence. Who was the one US President that went against the overwhelming trend of anti-communism? Nixon. Leading to the first “opening” of China (banking). China just made their second “opening” regarding AI: we all need to take this radical technology serious before…
Comparisons between Trump and Nixon are worthwhile in a number of levels. One, the CIA. Nixon created, under the ONI, the Office of Net Assessment in ‘73 as a counterweight to the non sense analysis coming out of the CIA.
Make America Great Again means what time period? We tend to assume Reagan, or post WWII 50s (Ike was Pres when Trump was growing up), or pre FDR, but what if it refers to the post 60s nuttiness leading up to Reagan? Who got a number of treaties in place with the communists? Nixon.
Digital is leading to a “Golden Age” or renaissance, meaning a kind of starting over with new rules. One could argue Nixon promoted this notion in ‘72 as Television was revamping the West…television also tried to assassinate Nixon (successful) and Trump (failed).
Do you really think that China would be doing this *but for* the fact that AUS has sailed naval ships through the Strait of Taiwan? Isn't this China sending a message that was prompted by unwise AUS actions?
Yes, China has been flexing its muscles in the South China Sea, but there's a big difference. Countries like Vietnam and Philippines are in China's backyard and the South China Sea is China's lifeline for Middle East oil. Is it not likely that China is being as aggressive as it has been in the South China Sea because it feels threatened by the ring of US bases that target that lifeline? In fact, China and Vietnam have worked out a sort of modus vivendi. Phiilippines, otoh, has tried to find a place under the US security umbrella--which is of increasingly dubious value. AUS poses a threat to China only insofar as AUS makes the choice to threaten China as part of a military alliance with the US. Like Poland vis a vis Russia, AUS vis a vis China--AUS does control its fate and needs to be smart for the long term.
Re those spheres of influence, in my view it's not that simple. For example, China needs to keep Russia on its side, it also has to find ways of getting along with India, Japan, Indonesia. And of course the US will always be out there in the Pacific, even if it backs off from the inner island chain. Russia's actual power projection capabilities are limited, and Russia has not shown an appetite for adventurism outside its near abroad--much as China has always had limited ambitions. China wants to do business with the world, not conquer. The same is true of China. Their current stances are largely dictated by what they correctly perceive as a threat from the US--and its vassals. Even the US is probably not in a position to push Brazil around too much. Nothing's so simple as three spheres of influence.
Your welcome. I'll add this. Trump 2.0--the foreign policy of which is still dominated by "China hawks"--is going to find that its Asian vassals are growing restive with confrontation with China dictated from DC. I believe countries like Japan, S. Korea, Philippines, Taiwan, will be reconsidering their relations with China in light of BRICS. They've seen Ukraine's fate and NATO's fate.
Listened to Napolitano's RoundTable this morning. Thought Johnson's argument unpersuasive then, and with respect to this blog's author, still find it unpersuasive.
Trump is New York City builder. For much of his life he has rubbed elbows with the people in Israel and in New York City who are calling the shots on turning 'Greater Israel' into a business/real estate project.
On the day after the Riyadh 'revolution,' Trump opened a 2-day conference with Israeli and Arab business entrepreneur, with his SiL Jared Kushner & his equity fund a focus and key speaker.
Trump's ties to the Jewish - (Arab) community are a lot deeper than just the donation from M Adelson -- Trump's Jewish-convert daughter, for one, plus his grandchildren being raised in Jewish (Mandarin!) traditions.
You are simply restating the concerns of many. 30 days in, lot’s of talk, action domestically yet we continue to arm a so called ally who is untrustworthy and an albatross on our backs. It remains to be seen what he’ll do.
And the purging of the generals has begun with the firing of Gen Brown, Chairman JCS, and the Chief of Naval Operations, and the JAGs for the 3 services, and the Vice Chief of Staff for AF. In the words of the irrelevant media, it was an abrupt, historic, and unprecedented move.
If irrelevant media took 5 seconds to Google they would find both their idols Climton and Obama unceremoniously fired high ranking flags. McMaster comes to mind.
"Trump said that Russia is dictating the terms of the ceasefire because Ukraine has no more "cards to play" He also stated that Russia now has the capacity to take over all of Ukraine.
This means that Ukraine's defenses are on the verge of collapse, and US weapons can no longer stop it."
The key factor is Russia has Grown - and US Weapons could never stop it
It was reported Russia entered Ukraine in 2022 with some 150,000 - 200,000 soldiers
they now have grown their military to more than 2 million most fully trained and with a 2 + year grinding daily combat experience
Russia technology and weapon manufacturing has also grown exponentially Russia weaponry out paces US in Every Category a) technology b) cost c) ability/speed to manufacture
There is no stronger experienced military anywhere in the world and no stronger supported / equipped military - no one could possibly challenge Russia in Europe meaning in that geographic region - logistics matter.
It is indeed a minefield, but Trump seems to be handling it quite well. For Ukraine, as (I think) George Orwell once said, the quickest way to end a war is to surrender. Maybe Trump should make good his threats to the Euroweenies and Z and just walk away. Most normal Americans and Brits are sick to the back teeth of the word "Ukraine" and would probably welcome such a move. Of course, the usual suspects will cry "betrayal!" and "giving in to dictators!" Let them. The key is MAGA on the homefront.
Speaking of the Euroweenies, it would be interesting to see whether Trump agrees to see the not-ready-for-prime-time duo of Starmer and Micron, still pushing their idea of a Euroweeny (peacekeeping) army backed by the US, or whether he delegates that task to JDV!
Too little, too late, is my first thought hearing this come from Cruz. It will never happen, and only serves to draw attention to Cruz as a “fighter.” Irrelevant distraction in my opinion.
Cruz is a highly paid boot boy for the Anglo-Zionists. He always yaps after the fact. His courage is dubious and his actions always limited to sound bites . Isn’t there a cliche, “sound and fury signifying nothing” that perfectly describes his words?
China has long said, and believes, that the US took up for the Brits, vis a vie China, after WWII. Who has rattled the saber the most regarding China? The Five Eyes members…not a coincidence. Who was the one US President that went against the overwhelming trend of anti-communism? Nixon. Leading to the first “opening” of China (banking). China just made their second “opening” regarding AI: we all need to take this radical technology serious before…
Comparisons between Trump and Nixon are worthwhile in a number of levels. One, the CIA. Nixon created, under the ONI, the Office of Net Assessment in ‘73 as a counterweight to the non sense analysis coming out of the CIA.
Make America Great Again means what time period? We tend to assume Reagan, or post WWII 50s (Ike was Pres when Trump was growing up), or pre FDR, but what if it refers to the post 60s nuttiness leading up to Reagan? Who got a number of treaties in place with the communists? Nixon.
Digital is leading to a “Golden Age” or renaissance, meaning a kind of starting over with new rules. One could argue Nixon promoted this notion in ‘72 as Television was revamping the West…television also tried to assassinate Nixon (successful) and Trump (failed).
Interesting times…
You can say that again. Stuff to think about.
Australia’s collective fear of populous South East Asia is something Jung could have written a tome about.
Chinese flares near Australian aircraft and sonars near divers is still a story.
Several boats in international waters is causing hysteria.
Just a snapshot of the Australian psyche, Australia’s Nobel laureate Burnet wanted to conduct biological warfare on Indonesia in the late 40s.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/burnets-solution-the-plan-to-poison-s-e-asia-20020310-gdu1d3.html
My concern over those Chinese Warships flexing their muscle off Australia's coast is this:
The continents of the 2 Americas and outlying Islands (Greenland) seem to be settled by the Great Powers to be USA "sphere of Influence".
Where does that leave Aus? It looks like China might be saying Aus is in theirs.
I understand that. However ...
Do you really think that China would be doing this *but for* the fact that AUS has sailed naval ships through the Strait of Taiwan? Isn't this China sending a message that was prompted by unwise AUS actions?
Yes, China has been flexing its muscles in the South China Sea, but there's a big difference. Countries like Vietnam and Philippines are in China's backyard and the South China Sea is China's lifeline for Middle East oil. Is it not likely that China is being as aggressive as it has been in the South China Sea because it feels threatened by the ring of US bases that target that lifeline? In fact, China and Vietnam have worked out a sort of modus vivendi. Phiilippines, otoh, has tried to find a place under the US security umbrella--which is of increasingly dubious value. AUS poses a threat to China only insofar as AUS makes the choice to threaten China as part of a military alliance with the US. Like Poland vis a vis Russia, AUS vis a vis China--AUS does control its fate and needs to be smart for the long term.
Re those spheres of influence, in my view it's not that simple. For example, China needs to keep Russia on its side, it also has to find ways of getting along with India, Japan, Indonesia. And of course the US will always be out there in the Pacific, even if it backs off from the inner island chain. Russia's actual power projection capabilities are limited, and Russia has not shown an appetite for adventurism outside its near abroad--much as China has always had limited ambitions. China wants to do business with the world, not conquer. The same is true of China. Their current stances are largely dictated by what they correctly perceive as a threat from the US--and its vassals. Even the US is probably not in a position to push Brazil around too much. Nothing's so simple as three spheres of influence.
Thanks Mark, your point of view is appreciated.
Your welcome. I'll add this. Trump 2.0--the foreign policy of which is still dominated by "China hawks"--is going to find that its Asian vassals are growing restive with confrontation with China dictated from DC. I believe countries like Japan, S. Korea, Philippines, Taiwan, will be reconsidering their relations with China in light of BRICS. They've seen Ukraine's fate and NATO's fate.
Listened to Napolitano's RoundTable this morning. Thought Johnson's argument unpersuasive then, and with respect to this blog's author, still find it unpersuasive.
Trump is New York City builder. For much of his life he has rubbed elbows with the people in Israel and in New York City who are calling the shots on turning 'Greater Israel' into a business/real estate project.
On the day after the Riyadh 'revolution,' Trump opened a 2-day conference with Israeli and Arab business entrepreneur, with his SiL Jared Kushner & his equity fund a focus and key speaker.
Trump's ties to the Jewish - (Arab) community are a lot deeper than just the donation from M Adelson -- Trump's Jewish-convert daughter, for one, plus his grandchildren being raised in Jewish (Mandarin!) traditions.
You are simply restating the concerns of many. 30 days in, lot’s of talk, action domestically yet we continue to arm a so called ally who is untrustworthy and an albatross on our backs. It remains to be seen what he’ll do.
And the purging of the generals has begun with the firing of Gen Brown, Chairman JCS, and the Chief of Naval Operations, and the JAGs for the 3 services, and the Vice Chief of Staff for AF. In the words of the irrelevant media, it was an abrupt, historic, and unprecedented move.
Abrupt, yes. Unprecedented, no.
If irrelevant media took 5 seconds to Google they would find both their idols Climton and Obama unceremoniously fired high ranking flags. McMaster comes to mind.
Megatron misses the key factor
"Trump said that Russia is dictating the terms of the ceasefire because Ukraine has no more "cards to play" He also stated that Russia now has the capacity to take over all of Ukraine.
This means that Ukraine's defenses are on the verge of collapse, and US weapons can no longer stop it."
The key factor is Russia has Grown - and US Weapons could never stop it
It was reported Russia entered Ukraine in 2022 with some 150,000 - 200,000 soldiers
they now have grown their military to more than 2 million most fully trained and with a 2 + year grinding daily combat experience
Russia technology and weapon manufacturing has also grown exponentially Russia weaponry out paces US in Every Category a) technology b) cost c) ability/speed to manufacture
There is no stronger experienced military anywhere in the world and no stronger supported / equipped military - no one could possibly challenge Russia in Europe meaning in that geographic region - logistics matter.
It is indeed a minefield, but Trump seems to be handling it quite well. For Ukraine, as (I think) George Orwell once said, the quickest way to end a war is to surrender. Maybe Trump should make good his threats to the Euroweenies and Z and just walk away. Most normal Americans and Brits are sick to the back teeth of the word "Ukraine" and would probably welcome such a move. Of course, the usual suspects will cry "betrayal!" and "giving in to dictators!" Let them. The key is MAGA on the homefront.
Speaking of the Euroweenies, it would be interesting to see whether Trump agrees to see the not-ready-for-prime-time duo of Starmer and Micron, still pushing their idea of a Euroweeny (peacekeeping) army backed by the US, or whether he delegates that task to JDV!
and yes, Trump is doing a super-human job - astounding.
Too little, too late, is my first thought hearing this come from Cruz. It will never happen, and only serves to draw attention to Cruz as a “fighter.” Irrelevant distraction in my opinion.
Cruz is a highly paid boot boy for the Anglo-Zionists. He always yaps after the fact. His courage is dubious and his actions always limited to sound bites . Isn’t there a cliche, “sound and fury signifying nothing” that perfectly describes his words?
Yes, from Macbeth.