Messages

I wouldn't even know how to find Cain on FB.

I would like to know...

Cain Aerte, located in Luxembourg

The US signing an MOU that requires the cooperation of a third party was a hilarious blunder.  Iran has set itself up with a Xanatos gambit.  I believe they knew what they were doing; Lebanon is mentioned three times in the first term of the MOU.  That's not concise diplomatic language, that's hammering the point across.

Iran likely went into this expecting Israel wouldn't cooperate.  But, what are the options?

If the US somehow, magically, gets Israel to stand down voluntarily, that's still a win for Iran--and it drives a wedge between the US and Israel.  This war appears to have popular support in Israel, even if Netanyahu doesn't.  The MOU being adhered to would leave Iran in a pretty strong position.

If Israel doesn't stand down voluntarily, then either:

The US attempts to force Israel to comply, by cutting off their weapons supplies, applying sanctions, or whatever other pressure they can bring to bear.  A weakened Israel would be a big win for Iran.  It's possible they want this even more than the terms of the MOU--after all, that $300 billion reconstruction fund sounds nice, but nobody expects Trump to hold up his side of any deal in the long-term.

The US doesn't force Israel to comply, and the MOU falls through.  Now, Iran has justification (on paper) for keeping the strait closed.  Not a best case for them, but they're still holding the cards.  I've heard it claimed that oil reserves will hit a wall in about four weeks, at which point things will get very bad, very quickly.  I guess if Cain was around, he might know if that is accurate.


I think Iran can't back down, and Israel won't, which means whatever happens, will be a result of US action. The US has already lost, but the ultimate form of that loss is unclear.  Will they back out entirely, without an agreement, and leave the rest of the world to clean up their mess?  Will they cut off Israel?  Will they attempt a ground invasion of Iran?  Will they come up with something even stupider than the above?

I don't think blunder is quite the right word.  I think a cessation of hostilities by Israel has always been a very important thing to Iran, I don't think there would have been any progress if that had been left out.  Now we get to see if the US actually does anything to reign Israel in.

Its times like these I really miss Cain's opinion

Does he not come around any more?

So the conflict with Iran keeps being announced as over, and then not really being over.  This most recent surrender at Versailles looks the most like a real end of any of them for a while, but I am seeing a lot of folks saying it isn't going to actually end anything.

Anyone want to weigh in?  Cain maybe?

I'm personally very frustrated by Schumer saying he will keep reparations from being authorized by congress if he can.  I do think that money should be coming directly from Donald Trump's funds, rather than the government, but we have absolutely, as a country, acted in awful ways that need to be compensated for.  Iran deserves reparations for the damage we have done.  Having a reconstruction fund will encourage more interaction between our countries, in ways that will create more opportunities to directly support Iranian people and their own, on the ground, struggles for freedom.  It's also a big fat pork barrel, which isn't a great thing, but should be motivating Schumer and others to get their fingers in the pork.

yeah, my roommate hasn't abandoned the Republicans, he's just finally critical of Trump.

My roommate is a magat, he's loved Trump all the way, until he started driving up the gas prices with this foolish adventure in Iran.  I don't think the inflation statement is something he noticed, it's pretty typical senile Trump rambling, but I can definitely see him alienating even his die hard fans at this point.

[Trump given option to 'order Diet Coke' or 'invade Iran' in arcade game at D.C. memorial]

The Resistance 2.0 has not lost it's sense of humor:

Trump given option to 'order Diet Coke' or 'invade Iran' in arcade game at D.C. memorial

"Three fully functional arcade games satirizing Trump's war with Iran make up a new protest art installation on the National Mall in Washington."

As per this article:

""The Trump administration knows that the best way to sell combat is by making it a video game, that's why they've been pumping out the 'sickest' Iran War video game hype reels. But why stop at clips when you could go full throttle?" states a plaque next to the games in the memorial.
 
"Introducing Operation Epic Furious: Strait to Hell, a high-octane, flag-waving, boots-on-the-ground simulator where freedom isn't debated, it's deployed. No briefings, no hesitation; just pure pixelated patriotism. Strap in and play hard, because this game may never end," the plaque next to the games reads.
 
The arcade games are expected to remain at the War Memorial on the National Mall, just south of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, for the next few days, the group said.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment."

Yes, the Secret Handshake is having fun resisting the Turd Reich.

The use of the battle hymn of the old republic in the sound track is interesting for me, I tend to think of that tune as John Brown's Body, or Solidarity Forever, both of which seem distinctly anti Trump.

I'm back again!!!!!

These days I am attracted to those spill detector robots at Stop & Shop. The ones with the big googly eyes.

Can you give me some romantic advice?

I would suggest learning Chinese, that's their native language.  Their attention is drawn to spills, so if you buy a nice bottle of wine, spill it, and then regale them with some classical love poetry that's likely to have success.

An RFP for a Made-in-Canada drone communications system has crossed my desk, and although there's no NDA, it's obviously intended as a proof-of-concept for military use.  Somebody in the chain of procurement has been spooked by something.

Movement away from the American sphere is in progress everywhere, both overt and otherwise.  How tangled up we still are when the Anschluss commences, remains to be seen.

I don't yet believe an Anschluss is inevitable, but I'm a hopelessly naive optimist.

An Anschluss implies at least the appearance of a referendum.  That's not going to happen.

I suppose not, although there is a small and loud contingent of Albertans that want that referendum.

Also, and trust me on this, you can't build weapons fast enough.

But it is also worth mentioning that frontage equations require 81 infantry divisions to MINIMALLY garrison Canada.  We have 12.

In an invasion of Canada, I expect the US would very quickly take the critical centers (Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, etc.), and then be free to bomb the rest of the population relatively unimpeded.  Ukraine has a lot of difficulty with air defense; our problem would be worse.

Any attempt at a large-scale ground occupation, however, would make Vietnam look like a garden party.

Realistically, though, a war between Canada and the US would end with revolution or collapse internal to the US, not because of anything Canada could do.

I could see that ending up with the US annexed by Canada, because we'd made such a mess of ourselves and they're the most viable option to work on cleaning it up.

[Only Republican Disqualified From Senate Race in Democrat-Led State]

I've never see, or heard of anything like this every happening in any state:

Only Republican Disqualified From Senate Race in Democrat-Led State

As per this article:

"New Mexico will have no Republican on the ballot for the U.S. Senate race after GOP candidate Christopher Vanden Heuvel was disqualified for failing to submit enough valid signatures to qualify, New Mexico's secretary of state press team told Newsweek."

And, as per further along in this article:

""I am writing to inform you that you did not qualify as a candidate for the office of United States Senator, pursuant to the express requirements of the New Mexico Election Code," a letter obtained by Newsweek signed by Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver sent to Heuvel.

The letter continued, "To qualify as a candidate for this office, a prospective candidate must submit a declaration of candidacy and the statutory minimum number of nominating petition signatures at the time of filing."

Oliver said that after review, the office determined that he "failed to reach the required 2,351 signatures in accordance with NMSA 1978, § 1-8-33.""

Now, perhaps requirements like this vary widely from state to state. But, requiring only 2,351 signatures to get a candidate for the U.S. Senate on a political party's ballot for their primary election sounds to me like a really low bar to jump. (Although in my state it's only 2,000 signatures, a $200 filing fee, and signatories must be members of the candidates political party.) Yet, the Republican Party of New Mexico (RPNM), couldn't qualify a single candidate. Not one.

Weird, New Mexico is pretty purple.

That was part of it but she was also continuing very tried and tested voice of the establishment that Biden had represented, there's no appetite for that.
Its the reason AOC had a chance and Harris would have none

AOC was not on the ballot seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party for POTUS in 2024. Joe Biden won the majority of the pledged delegates during the party's primary process, easily beating two (2) other already long forgotten male contenders. But, Biden ended his campaign for reelection before being officially nominated. Then, as per Rule 13J of the party's delegate selection rules, pledged delegates were left free to vote for whoever they wanted to be their candidate. And, after the delegates negotiated among themselves, Kamala Harris was nominated to run for POTUS, without a second national level Democratic Party primary vote being held. So, I'm unaware of any serious possibility where "AOC had a chance" to run for the office, much less become the current POTUS.

But, let me get this straight:

On Tuesday, Election Day, November 5th, 2024, 77,303,568 'Mericans had the choice between a very old, unhealthy looking, white, male, boorish, misogynist, racist, Putin lovin', pedophile friending, twice impeached, economy sinking, COVID-19 pandemic denying, 2020 election losing, failed January 6th insurrection leading, convicted felon, and adjudicated rapist, that was on the ballot with an 'R' after its name, and Vice President Kamala Harris. And, each of those voters said to themselves something to the effect of, "Oh, hell yeah, baby! Gimme some more of that first one! I don't want no "very tried and tested voice of the establishment" politician runnin' no gubernment of mine!

Come on?! Seriously?! Are you really going to go with that?!

You're missing the option that most people picked, which was "none of the above" That's what happens when the choices are "the bad you're used to" and "worse"

[The Democrat James Carville thinks is worth watching in 2028 will surprise you]

November 7th, 2028 is  a long way off, and a lot is going to happen between now and the U.S. Presidential Election. But, at the time of this posting, I think James Carville knows what he's talking about:

The Democrat James Carville thinks is worth watching in 2028 will surprise you

"Carville says Kamala Harris 'has no chance' in 2028 Democratic primary"

As per this article:

"Asked about whether he could see Harris as the party's standard-bearer in 2028, Carville responded, "She has no chance."

Harris replaced then-President Joe Biden as the Democrats' 2024 presidential nominee after Biden dropped his bid in July of that year, a month after a disastrous debate performance against Trump. Harris ended up losing the general election to Trump, who narrowly swept all seven key battleground states.

"No Democrat wants anything to do with anybody that had anything to do with 2024," Carville emphasized, as he reasoned why Harris couldn't win the 2028 nomination. He also questioned whether Harris, the nation's first female and first Black vice president, had the ability to energize the Black community if she launched another White House run.

Carville said that the Democrats' mantra heading into 2028 is "just win," and argued that "if we nominate two white males, nobody's going to give a s---.""

And, I couldn't agree more.

The candidate's race and gender matter a lot less than their positions.  If we nominate Newsom and Buttigeig they'll repeat Harris' losing strategy of attempting to pursue GOP voters while ignoring progressives and the left.  At this point a candidate that campaigns on cutting off Israel, and dismantling ICE can win, one that supports genocide and retaining the American Gestapo isn't going to be able to out fascist Vance, or whoever the GOP puts up, but they will be able to alienate a huge portion of their base.

My preference would be for a working class patriot who wants to take down the pedophiles and the system that enabled their predation.  I haven't seen a candidate like that yet, but I'm sure there are some out there.  I know that would resonate with not only the left, and the mainstream Democrats, but also QAnon types and a lot of the folks who voted for Sanders and Trump, or Trump and Mamdani.

There needs to be a lot more of this.

In Nazi Germany the two strongest forces of resistance to the Brownshirts were the jazz fans. Jazz was one of the first things the one balled arsehole banned as it was black music. (Echoes of this in the Bad Bunny fiasco at the Super bowl) Kids took wind up gramophones to parks & beaches to dance in overt acts of public rebellion. They fought running battles with Hitler Youth & SA units. Often utilising those gramophones as weapons.

Florida kids have taken up the cudgel. Don't be like the German parents were & let them stand alone against tyranny.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/2069178570572909

You said two, and then only named one, who other than the Jazzy Jermans?

[Bill and Hillary Clinton refuse to testify on Jeffrey Epstein]

Bill and Hillary Clinton refuse to testify on Jeffrey Epstein

"House Oversight Chair James Comer said the committee would launch contempt of Congress proceedings against the former president, who skipped his deposition on Tuesday."

This is an absolutely brilliant political move by the Clintons!

There's a lot of MAGAtry out there right now in positions of power who don't know whether to shit of go blind over this move! So, check your popcorn supply! This is going to be good!

Could you explain why you see this as such a good move?

I usually hear "crossing the rubicon" as doing a big thing, that can't be taken back.  I've never heard it as specifically heroic, although sometimes it is, in context.  I also don't hear it in specific context as ending a republic, or anything else about the results of the action, that's specific.  it's always just a big, irrevocable, act that commits someone to a conflict in a way they can't take back.

Invading Greenland would be Trump crossing the rubicon, destroying NATO and whatnot.