JPMorgan, BlackRock, and State Street Global Advisors have pulled out of the United Nations Climate Alliance as it becomes increasingly aware that customers aren’t interested in the draconian, sovereignty-killing plans of the UN to allegedly “save the planet” and the “remedies” would destroy the businesses that the plan relies on to come to fruition.
JPMorgan stated, “The firm has built a team of 40 dedicated sustainable investing professionals, including investment stewardship specialists who also leverage one of the largest buy side research teams in the industry. Given these strengths and the evolution of its own stewardship capabilities, JPMAM has determined that it will no longer participate in Climate Action 100+ engagements.”
JPMorgan Chase and institutional investors BlackRock and State Street Global Advisors announced Thursday that they are quitting or, in the case of BlackRock, substantially scaling back involvement in a massive United Nations climate alliance formed to combat global warming through corporate sustainability agreements.
In a statement, the New York-based Jamie Dimon’s JPMorgan explained that it would exit the so-called Climate Action 100+ investor group because of the expansion of its in-house sustainability team and the establishment of its climate risk framework in recent years.
Larry Fink’s BlackRock and State Street, which both manage trillions of dollars in assets, said the alliance’s climate initiatives had gone too far, expressing concern about potential legal issues as well.
The stunning announcements come as the largest financial institutions in the US and worldwide face an onslaught of pressure from consumer advocates and Republican states over their environmental, social and governance (ESG) priorities.
With both Mexico and the United States facing elections for the top offices in their land, the American left and the Mexican left have forged an agreement to assure illegal immigration into the U.S. is limited until their elections are over.
Mexico has an election for their top spot, President, in June while the Democrats in America face an election in November.
Mexico and the United States will hold presidential elections within the same calendar year for the first time in more than two decades. Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador’s willingness to crack down on migrant crossings may have more to do with securing an election victory for U.S. President Joe Biden and his own ruling Morena political party than securing the border. A temporary pause in migration designed to ensure a November win for the Democrats in the United States and a June win for AMLO’s Morena party candidate, Claudia Sheinbaum, could keep the border wide open for years to come.
A 2024 win for both Sheinbaum and President Biden in the near-simultaneous elections would also benefit Mexico’s violent cartels, who profit from the lax national security posture present in both countries. A victory for Sheinbaum, who shares AMLO’s stance on dealing with Mexican cartels with “hugs, not bullets,” will likely spell a continuation of the cartel’s ability to continue flooding the United States with fentanyl and other narcotics if paired with a Biden victory…
The effects of the under-the-radar Biden/AMLO border plan have been visible in Texas border cities. According to a source within U.S. Customs and Border Protection, apprehensions along the Texas border have dropped by 60 percent between December and February. As reported by Breitbart Texas, the sudden reduction in migrant crossings along the Texas-Mexico border began shortly after a series of meetings between Biden and AMLO in late December, followed by a meeting between the Mexican President and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas shortly afterward.
Michigan’s State Board of Education pushed back against the anti-American party’s push to create a database of homeschool parents, warning that the process could open the door for warrantless searches of homeschool families.
The anti-American party, the DNC-CCP, is pushing forward with its plans to create the homeschool database, claiming they’re infringing on the rights of Americans to “save the children,” the usual tactic that ironically comes from the party of death that advocates murdering children up to and soon after birth.
The State Board of Education in Michigan meeting on Feb 13th, 2024 raised concerns about registration lists for homeschooled parents…
On February 13th, the Michigan State Board of Education met for their monthly meeting. Towards the end of the meeting, prior to closing, Board Member Tom McMillin of Oakland Township added his comments regarding a push to require registration requirements for homeschooling.
McMillin’s issue with creating a registration has been a contentious subject in Michigan dating back to at least 2015. However, recently the proposed “list” idea has thrust itself back into the spotlight after a case in Clinton County, where two couples are accused of adopting “nearly 30 children, some of whom the [couples] are accused of abusing.”
In response to the case, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said in an X post that “implementing monitoring mechanisms is crucial to ensure that all children, including those homeschooled, receive necessary protections.” McMillin believes that “a mere registration, a list of people…will not help prevent what AG Nessel is talking about.” He believes the list is nothing more than a pathway to monitoring and said that Nessel is “saying the quiet part out loud”:
“She basically said we want this list so we can have…warrantless home entry into this particular targeted group…but we have a legal system that says you have to have a warrant before you go in.
However, because of this one instance, some in the state want to be able to barge in and bust the door down….It’s not hyperbolic. If they knock on the door and they say “no, I don’t want you to come in”…and there’s all kinds of reasons not to have them in…there’s a book called “Three Felonies a Day”…if the government wants to get you, there going to find something. Without a warrant, they shouldn’t be coming into your house.
I just think…it’s going to go beyond registration. They’re either naive or they’re being disingenous for anybody to say ‘all we want to do is have a list.’ It’s going to go significantly further than that. They’re going to either want to know exactly what’s being taught or they’re going to want entry into the houses. And so I think that this is a real problem. I guess I just wish that the debate would be sincere.
…anyone with half a brain realizes it doesn’t stop there.”
Lawfare Assassin and DNC-CCP revolutionary activist “Judge” Arthur Engoron has denied Donald J Trump’s request for a 30-day stay on his nearly half a billion fine for committing fraud without a victim. The move was not unexpected, but it further lays bare the absolute lawlessness of the party this seditious Judge represents, the DNC-CCP, frenemy to America’s enemies.
The judge who presided over the civil fraud case against Donald Trump and his company has rejected his attorney’s request to delay enforcing the $350 million judgment against them.
“You have failed to explain, much less justify, any basis for a stay,” Judge Arthur Engoron wrote in an email Thursday to Trump attorney Clifford S. Robert shortly before he officially signed off on the judgment, which totals over $450 million with pre-judgment interest.
In an email to the judge Wednesday, Robert noted that the company has a court-appointed monitor already in place, so “there is no prejudice to the (state) Attorney General in briefly staying enforcement to allow for an orderly post-Judgement process, particularly given the magnitude of Judgement.”
A special counsel in the New York attorney general’s office, Andrew Amer, said in a letter to Engoron Thursday that he shouldn’t grant Robert’s request because the defendants didn’t “provide any basis for staying enforcement of the judgement.” He also noted that the defendants “requested such relief in their post-trial brief, which the Court declined to grant.”
The Lawfare assault on former President Donald J Trump that is the NY Fraud trial produced a draconian verdict that is sending shockwaves throughout the billionaire class in NY, with former Shark Tank star and current billionaire Kevin O’Leary joining a growing list of wealthy people who are pledging to keep their business out of the state.
It seems when you assault a man for political reasons using lawfare as a means to illegally confiscate his wealth, the wealthy get nervous that the kind of power you’re creating doesn’t offer them the security that the old American model afforded them. Perhaps competition IS better than state protection, after all.
… On Monday, “Shark Tank” star and famed investor Kevin O’Leary declared that he is ceasing all future investment activities in New York.
He labeled NY a “loser state” due to its political climate and legal persecution of Trump.
O’Leary is now turning his attention to states like Oklahoma, North Dakota, West Virginia, Florida, and Texas for his future business ventures.
Also on Monday, private equity fund manager Grant Cardone, a hugely successful and prominent businessman with $4 billion in assets under management, announced he will “NOT waste time in New York.”…
In a Monday post on X, Cardone said:
“Cardone Capital just started to research real estate investments in New York believing it was time to get into the market.
“After the overreach by the judge in the Trump case & penalties imposed of $355M I told them team do NOT waste time in New York.
“We will 2X our efforts in: Florida, Arizona, Texas, Tennessee.”
CardoneCapital just started to research real estate investments in New York believing it was time to get into the market.
After the over reach by the judge in the Trump case & penalties imposed of $355M I told them team do NOT waste time in New York.
Nikki Haley’s campaign at this point is mostly being supported by 5,200 wealthy Democrats who hope to defeat Trump in the GOP primary, knowing full well a Haley candidacy will lose to the Democrat since she is effectively running as one. 1,600 of these Democrats gave Haley over half a million dollars in January of this year alone.
That point is brought through by this quote from one of her biggest Democrat “supporters,” LinkedIn billionaire Reid Hoffman, who said, “While I am a staunch supporter of Biden and hope he will win a second term, I also provided financial support to Nikki Haley’s super PAC [because] my first priority is to defeat Trump, and the [Republican] primary is the first of two chances to do so.”
Nimarata ‘Nikki’ Haley’s failing presidential campaign is being bankrolled by over 5,200 former donors to Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign, lending credence to Donald Trump’s contention that she is only remaining in the race to try and damage him ahead of the general election.
The Biden donors underwriting Haley include 1,600 people who donated over $500,000 in January alone — her biggest month for donations ever, despite the fact she was crushed by Trump in Iowa, where she placed third, and New Hampshire.
Previously, the former United Nations ambassador received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn billionaire and visitor to Epstein Island who has also bankrolled E. Jean Carroll and Russia hoaxers Fusion GPS.
A Fox News study claims that 7.3 million people have entered the U.S. illegally, which is enough to fill the current population levels of 36 U.S. states combined. Last year was a record year that saw over 2.4 million people entering the U.S. illegally.
NEW DELHI: Around 7.3 million migrants illegally entered the United States by crossing the southwest border during President Biden’s tenure, according to a Fox News study.
Greater than the population of 36 individual states, if the current rate of illegal immigration does not decrease, fiscal year 2024 is projected to surpass last year’s record of 2,475,669 southwest border contacts, as reported by Fox News.
The figures are sourced from the United States Customs and Border Protection, which has already reported 961,537 border interactions in the current fiscal year, spanning from October to September.
The total number of southwest land border interactions since Biden took office in 2021 is 7,298,486, according to CBP data.
On January 24th 2024, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued a statement, concerning the right of the State of Texas to defend itself from invasion, because – quoting from the statement – the Federal Government as a body and specifically, the administration of President Joe Biden, have broken the Compact between the Several States and the Federal Government (the foundational concept that underpins the notion of the “United States of America”) by not simply pointedly and openly declining to defend the nation from a literal “invasion” at the southern border, but in actively taking measures to prevent the State of Texas from defending itself.
Abbott specifically cited the Biden administration failing to fulfill its duties under Article IV § 4 of the Constitution, which has now required Abbott, as Governor, to invoke Article 1 § 10 Clause 3 of the Constitution requiring him to take measures to defend the state.
This statement was issued on the heels of a frankly stunning decision by the United States Supreme Court on January 22nd, which allowed the US Border Patrol to remove razor wire barricades emplaced by Texas National Guard troops assigned to defend Texas’ border with Mexico along the Rio Grande River. In effect, the Supreme Court sided with the Biden administration in suborning an invasion of the United States.
The massive influx of illegal aliens is a subject we have discussed here previously. The fairest “neutral” assessment of the impact of illegal immigration comes from, of all places, Wikipedia:
However, given the reactions of “sanctuary cities” – most of them longtime strongholds of the Democrat Party – to having waves of “migrants” dumped (waves that are not even comparable to the numbers being dumped on Texas) on their doorsteps, not just by Republican-led states such as Texas and Florida, but by the Federal Government itself, it is clear that the staggering numbers are having an immediate, clear and disproportionate impact on the nation (leaving aside said migrants frequently complaining bitterly about the aid and shelter they are given, including appeals to citizens to house illegal aliens in churches and private homes).
In response to Governor Abbott’s January 24th statement, many politicians have begun to hysterically demand that President Biden federalize the Texas National Guard to halt the Texas program to stem the flow of illegal migrants, and to restrict them to using the legal crossing points, and to follow the established legal processes.
This situation (which has been building for well over a decade as of this writing), and the breathless demands to invoke the Insurrection Act to stop Texas’ actions, has brought the nation perilously close to an actual “civil war”, for the first time since 1860. This is because, as of this writing, some twenty-five state Governors have definitively stated their support of Governor Abbott and the state of Texas.
Actually federalizing a state’s National Guard against the wishes of their state’s governor has been done before, famously in 1957 in Arkansas in regards to the “Little Rock Nine”. A popular misconception is that a state’s National Guard cannot be federalized without that state’s governor consenting to the mobilization. As demonstrated in Arkansas, this is patently untrue.
The National Guard was created by the Militia Act of 1903, known popularly as the “Dick Act” after its sponsor, Ohio Congressman Charles Dick (R), in response to the severe manpower shortage in the US Army in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War (1898) and the subsequent campaigns against Filipino guerrillas in the Philippines Insurrection (1899-1902).
This latter campaign was hampered by American volunteers – who had been enlisted for a period of two years – insisting on being sent home after the conclusion of the war against Spain. As those who had volunteered specifically for the war against Spain were technically still a part of the Militia of the United States, they could not be required to serve longer than the conclusion of the war unless they specifically volunteered to do so.
This manpower issue came from Article 1, § 8, Clause 15 of the “Militia Clauses” (which includes Clause 16 of the same Article and Section) of the Constitution, which strictly limits the call-up and use of the Militia to executing “…the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions…” As a result, the United States quickly found itself significantly hampered in the Philippines by not having enough troops.
The “Dick Act” was written specifically to bypass the restrictions of the “Militia Clauses”, in order to create a new military entity in the form of the National Guard (and later, the Air National Guard). In effect, the “Dick Act” created a type of reserve formation for the US Army (before the creation of the actual “Army Reserve”), which (ultimately) would be equipped and trained by the US Army, but which be paid for by the states, who would also be allowed to use the military formations within the state, at the discretion of its governor. However, if the Federal government decided that they needed to mobilize the National Guard, they could do so at any time…whether a governor agrees with the Federal government or not, as was demonstrated in 1957, in Arkansas.
In the context of the hysterical demands of partisan political hacks, this would mean that President Biden would have to declare the State of Texas to be in rebellion against the United States – something that has only happened once in United States history – in order to force the Texas National Guard to disregard the orders of its state Commander in Chief in the face of an active invasion of their state.
Stop, and consider that implication.
If President Biden were to take such an ill-advised action, that would place the Texas National Guard in the position of obeying either the Federal Government – and allowing a massive invasion of their home state by massive numbers of “military-age males” who certainly did not walk north from homes in Mexico, or Central or South America, because “economic asylum seekers” do not buy airplane tickets from Africa to Mexico, in order to walk north…
…Conversely, the Texas National Guard could refuse orders to federalize. This would constitute “Mutiny”, under Article 94 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, the legal code of the US armed forces), at the very least. This would place the Federal government in the position of having to arrest up to 19,000 peopleen masse.
In like manner, there would then be the question of the reactions of the various states and governors who have expressed their solidarity with Governor Abbott’s actions…
This perilous situation is the ultimate outcome of decades of neglect, political pandering and the abject failure of successive Federal governments to execute the most basic of their duties, duties that the Several States voluntarily allowed the Federal Government to maintain authority for, as a condition of their joining the Federal Union in 1789. Leaving aside the obtuse legalities of this situation, the reality is that the American Left – led primarily by the Democrat Party – has driven the nation to a potential breakpoint, where the States may well declare the sitting Federal Government to no longer be a legitimate body. Such an action could go in several directions, none of them good, and all of them highly dangerous.
And while pundits and armchair-warrior-gamers may believe the nearly incoherent ramblings of President Biden, the reality is that the United States military and law enforcement establishments are not able to enforce any nationwide martial law order; in fact, it is questionable if they could enforce such an order over any large metropolitan area, given what happened the last time Federal troops were deployed under “Operation Garden Plot” was engaged.
…In the end, this writer has no solution to this problem, other than telling the Federal government to do its job in securing the borders of the United States, which it has consistently failed to do for over forty years.
The alternatives are not desired by any sane person.
The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
There are wars, and rumors of wars, all over the world as 2024 dawns. Russia and Ukraine continue to bludgeon each other relentlessly. Israel’s war against Hamas grinds on, threatening to expand into the southern territory of Lebanon under the control of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terror group. To the south and east, the Houthis in Yemen are waging a “pin-prick war” that has diverted some 12% of the world’s commercial shipping, forcing extensive delays and threatening to log-jam global trade on a scale that rivals the dislocations of the COVID pandemic, as their backers in Iran rattle their own sabers and threaten the oil export structure of the Persian Gulf.
Across the Red Sea from Yemen, wars rage in Sudan and Ethiopia, while Ethiopia’s own actions threaten wars with Eritrea and Somalia. To the north, Egypt and Jordan – for different reasons – are on the verge of internal collapse. Throughout the rest of Africa, nations struggle with internal, interminable and seemingly unsolvable issues, with many states facing continued attacks from radical jihadist militias. In Myanmar, the military government is clinging to power by its proverbial fingernails. In South America, Venezuela continues to threaten the annexation of Guyana, while Bolivia and Ecuador are the new battlegrounds in the war of the drug cartels.
Naturally, with all of these long-running – or suddenly appearing – conflicts, most of them remote, obscure and obtuse to outsiders, there are other conflicts that get lost in the shuffle…but those conflicts are no less important; in fact, many of them are not petty in any way, with the victims not simply being on the short end of the stick, but who were actively abandoned to the whims of ‘realpolitik’.
The war in Kurdistan is just that kind of conflict.
The wars and depredations inflicted on the Kurdish people for over one hundred years have largely been caused by the West, primarily Britain and France…but the United States hasn’t helped. And that war continues, not only against Syria and Turkey, but against Iran.
While the Kurdish nation has been noted as a separate and distinct people since the 11th Century, when the term “Kurdistan” was noted by the Seljuk Empire, it was only after World War 1, and the last, vile gasp of debased European imperialism – the Sykes-Picot Agreement – that the real agony began.
Neither Kurdistan nor its people were given more than lip service by Britain and France. Bolshevik (Communist) Russia repudiated any Russian claims associated with the agreement after the revolution that unseated the Tsar, as they had far more pressing problems. The signatories, channeling previous agreements covering African and Asia, cavalierly split what they, themselves, knew to be ethnically Kurdish areas between themselves to rule. While subsequent, limp-wristed treaties “graciously” allowed for the possibility of a Kurdish state (despite several Kurdish states being organized from 1918 to 1930), the European powers threw up their hands in 1923, and washed their hands of the Kurdish areas, for the most part, with the Treaty of Lausanne, which made no mention of the region at all, condemning the Kurdish people to be split between what is now Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. The Kurd’s only ally of significance was Winston Churchill, who argued for a separate Kurdish state, but his political influence in the 1920’s was very limited, compared to what it would become in later decades.
Lt Col Francis R. Maunsell’s map, Pre-World War I British Ethnographical Map of eastern Turkey in Asia, Syria and western Persia, 1910. Kurdish regions are in yellow. Library of Congress.
The 1920 Treaty of Sèvres was a draft treaty between the Ottoman Empire and the Principal Allied Powers. It was ultimately shelved because of Turkish non-ratification and was replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne. Map by User:Zero0000 CCA/4.0
But the Kurds wouldn’t give up.
The Kurds sent a delegation to the San Francisco Peace Conference of 1945, which would form the United Nations, to argue for an independent state; they were, of course, refused. But, armed Kurdish groups continually waged low-level guerrilla wars against the states they had been relegated to; the wars’ ferocity depended on how intense the ruling government’s programs to suppress Kurdish culture were at the time.
However, this would occasionally swing into full-on war crime territory, as happened in the Halabja Massacre of 1988, when the Kurdish village was attacked with lethal “war agent” chemicals weapons, primarily mustard gas, but also with a mix of nerve and blood agents. It is generally assumed that Saddam Hussein’s government was responsible for the attack, although allegations have long been made against Iran.
When the 1991 Persian Gulf War ended, US President George H. W. Bush made casual, off-hand remarks, that left many in Iraq – including the Kurds – believing that if they rose up to overthrow Saddam Hussein, they would get at least some help from the United States. Unfortunately for them, the Kurds in the north and Shi’a Iraqis in the south read far too much into the first Bush’s words, and were left stunned (assuming they lived) then they rose up…and the United States barely lifted a finger, seemingly completely surprised that the subject peoples of a brutal dictatorship might actually have the gall to rise up in armed revolt against said brutal government.
The absolute cheek of little people.
Shamed into doing something, though, the Bush administration launched “Operation Provide Comfort” to protect Kurdish refugees fleeing the Iraqi Army units not destroyed fighting the United States and its allies in Kuwait.
Quite unintentionally, this would be the first real break for Kurdish autonomy since 1918. The strict limiting of Iraqi military abilities against the Kurds left the northern people able to organize in safety, and begin building a formal military organization, the Peshmerga, from scattered guerrilla forces. While remaining in “recognition limbo” – without formal recognition as a sovereign state – the Kurdish authorities could not legally purchase military weapons on the open world market, forcing them to develop a “cottage industry” for making weapons, alongside reusing weapons captured from Iraqi forces when the government in Baghdad drags its feet on providing any, buying weapons on the black market and the occasional under-the-table crumbs offered by a scattering of Western states.
With the overthrow of Saddam in 2003, and the resulting upheaval in the aftermath, this organization became much more formalized and professional, at least compared to where it had been. It still has serious internal issues, a reflection of thirty-odd years of disordered and fragmented political organization, leading to a fragmented command and operational structure.
Kurdistan deserves better, not least because they have carried the United States water in the region with little return for their money. Kurdistan, from 2003 onwards, made themselves into a safe area for the US and its allies, doing what it could against Al Qaeda-aligned jihadist groups, for very little return.
Kurdistan remains split between four nations, with no prospect of real help from anyone else. Syria, still embroiled in its decade-and-a-half long civil war, has no intention of allowing its Kurdish regions to leave the country; the autonomous region known as “Rojava” formalized in 2018 is nothing more than a convenience for Bashar al-Assad’s government in Damascus.
The United States is unlikely to attempt to rein in the extreme excesses of Turkey’s operations in its own Kurdish areas, nor the northern parts of Syria and Iraq. This is because Turkey, as a member of NATO, is vital to European security…even as the Turkish state keeps expanding its influence throughout the world.
Likewise, Iraq is not about to allow its own Kurdish areas to actually leave, as that would remove a large oil-producing area from the country, fundamentally weakening the shaky government in Baghdad.
And then – there is Iran.
The mullahs in control of Iran view its Kurdish population as a useful foil that allows them to accuse any number of nations of trying to undermine them, while occasionally killing people wholesale to intimidate all of its ethnic minorities.
Now, however, with wider wars exploding throughout the region, as well as the rest of the world, the faint glimmer exists that the Kurds may soon have a chance to finally establish themselves as an organized state. The chances are remote, and it will be neither easy nor bloodless, but the chance is there.
The question is: Can the Kurd’s leadership come together to capitalize on the opportunity?
If they can, the United States should help make it happen – that’s not “imperialism”. That’s helping your actual friends, who have sacrificed to help you in the past, with no prompting.
The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
It would seem that 2024 is off with a bang, if the Reader will forgive the pun.
Beginning on October 7th of 2023, of course, Hamas launched its suicidal Don Quixote war with Israel, showing that the debased savagery of the Islamic State is alive and well. Shortly after, on October 13th, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abey Ahmed announced what can only be termed a policy of “lebensraum” for Ethiopia, demanding free access to the Red Sea. And, as if on cue, the Houthi rebels in Yemen began attacking any unarmed commercial vessels they could draw a bead on in the nautical chokepoint of the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, controlling the southern access point to the Red Sea.
Now, as the second week of January 2024 closes, Iran has entered the fray, seizing the oil tanker St. Nikolas off the coast of Oman, in the Arabian Sea, significantly widening the security problem – and potential naval combat area. Iran’s explanation for the seizure is a flimsy claim to Iranian ownership, a claim even flimsier than the excuse of the Houthi’s for attacking ships in the Red Sea.
Obviously, as we reported last week, all of this military action has begun to significantly impact world commerce, as increasing numbers of shipping lines abandon the critical Red Sea route, opting for the much longer transit around the Cape of Good Hope.
The question for most Readers is, obviously, “Where is the US Navy in all of this?” Good question.
The United States Navy is, unquestionably, the most powerful navy the world has ever seen. Disputing that statement is, frankly, ludicrous. The United States currently operates more aircraft carriers for fixed-wing operations than the rest of the world, combined…and this is before the various US Marine Corps aviation squadrons are added to its figures. It operates some seventy-six Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, regarded as the most capable destroyer class ever designed. Likewise, the US Navy maintains amphibious and supply forces that no other nation can match, giving it a truly global reach. It is not an exaggeration to say that a US Navy carrier battle group can deploy more firepower to a region than can be mustered by most nations’ entire militaries.
So – handling the Houthi’s, or even Iran, should present no great trouble for the United States, right?
Well…it’s complicated.
While the United States does, indeed, have a vast and capable military, like the armed forces of Great Britain before it, it has a major problem. It is not really a question of how good your weapons are; the greatest warship ever designed is completely useless if it isn’t where you need it to be, when you need it to be there.
The US military, and specifically the US Navy, cannot be everywhere at once. Aside from the chronic, military-wide problems with both recruiting and retention of personnel, the political leadership of the United States has, for the preceding forty years or so, almost uniformly failed to make even reasonably good choices in economic, military, social and foreign policy decisions. These failed policies have led to critically short numbers of personnel in almost all of the armed services, which translates into too few forces being available to deal with multiple threats. Indeed, while the US Navy, as of 2019, had some four hundred and eighty ships in commission, it could only deploy about two hundred and ninety.
What does this mean in the modern day, of January 2024?
As US and Western industry still struggles to supply the war in Ukraine, that situation is now worse, as the limited supply of ammunition is further divided to support Israel in its war against Hamas. Added to this, is the double threat from Iran and it’s Houthi proxies, a threat that is already damaging world commerce.
And then – there is Communist China…more on that, later.
Many people fail to grasp the impact of world shipping. Like it or not, everything you rely on is tied into global commerce in some way. Even if nothing you directly interact with physically transits the Red Sea, the major delays created will affect the prices of the everyday item you pay for. Likewise, the rising interest and insurance rates caused by the fighting will impact the Reader in a very real way, as those industries have to spread out the damage.
The end result of actions like this, is universally bad for the capabilities of a nation’s military forces, overall, as it significantly hampers military initiative, in favor of rigid obedience to political dogma – translation: Scare your military enough, and they will be too busy avoiding being shot by your political officers to fight your actual enemies.
However, there are many forms of warfare, and Communist China has learned that throwing money at a problem can make that problem either go away, or at least not bother it…and undermining an enemy while doing so is icing on the cake.
The bottom line? The West is failing. It is failing partially from it’s own success, but mostly from too many decades of throwing pasta at walls to see what sticks. The desire for profit beyond the dreams of avarice has led to a simultaneous weakening of Western industry, and to “good enough” levels of technological and industrial capacity leaking out to nations and groups who hate the West.
In a word: they hate you. It’s not so much that they hate you, personally – but they hate the society you grew up in, and are more than happy – and capable – of burning the world to the ground to spite you.
As of this writing, there are two hundred and ninety-seven days to the 2024 election. One way or another, you need a plan for what happens when we get there.
Assuming, of course, that we get there.
The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Back FREEDOM for only $4.95/month and help the Freedomist to fight the ongoing war on liberty and defeat the establishment's SHILL press!!
Are you enjoying our content? Help support our mission to reach every American with a message of freedom through virtue, liberty, and independence! Support our team of dedicated freedom builders for as little as $4.95/month! Back the Freedomist now! Click here