SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-24, 05:26 PM   #7876
ET2SN
ET2/SS
 
ET2SN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,545
Downloads: 58
Uploads: 0


Default




I'm just sayin'.
ET2SN is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-24, 06:12 PM   #7877
u crank
Old enough to know better
 
u crank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prince Edward Island
Posts: 11,566
Downloads: 136
Uploads: 0


Default

President Biden Just Made His Biggest Blunder

https://dnyuz.com/2024/05/09/preside...ggest-blunder/

This is the New York Times a reliable left wing publication. Why does Bret Stephens say this?

Quote:
The munitions cutoff helps Hamas.

It doesn’t end the war. It prolongs it.

It diminishes Israel’s deterrent power and is a recipe for a wider war.

There will be unintended foreign-policy consequences.

It’s a political gift to Donald Trump.
__________________

“Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.”

― Arthur C. Clarke




u crank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-24, 09:08 PM   #7878
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,917
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by u crank View Post
President Biden Just Made His Biggest Blunder

https://dnyuz.com/2024/05/09/preside...ggest-blunder/

This is the New York Times a reliable left wing publication. Why does Bret Stephens say this?
Last time someone just thinking about holding up a shipment he was impeached.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

Last edited by Rockstar; 05-12-24 at 06:41 AM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-24, 01:15 PM   #7879
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,917
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Biden’s Incoherent Energy-Policy Response to the War in Ukraine

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/...ar-in-ukraine/

Quote:
It has harmed U.S. interests while aiding major industrial competitors in China and India.

In mid April, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin joined Secretary of State Antony Blinken in urging Ukraine to desist from attacking Russian oil refineries. Such attacks have disabled up to 15 percent of refinery capacity in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, denting both its ability to earn export income and to wage war against Ukraine. In an election year, the Biden administration’s policy clearly values domestic fuel-price stability over helping Ukraine in its war for survival. The stated purpose of the U.S.-led price cap and ban on Russian exports to the West is to maintain Russia’s supplies while reducing the income from its exports without causing a price spike by taking Russian oil off the world market.

Biden’s policy has harmed U.S. interests while aiding major industrial competitors in China and India. These huge economies are exploiting cheap Russian oil imports to build new refining capacity. Additionally, shifting oil refining to these countries has had negative environmental effects and weakened U.S. industrial competitiveness.

There are better policies to maintain global price stability, starting with reversing the regulatory squeeze on U.S. oil and gas production. Earlier in its tenure, the administration reduced the holdings of the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve by 43 percent, which limited Washington’s ability to use these stocks to offset severe price spikes. The Biden team has also closed off the possibility of cooperation with longtime ally Saudi Arabia to keep prices stable by increasing the weight of human-rights considerations in the relationship. U.S. policy keeps Iranian oil on the market, leads to additional discounted sales to China, and helps finance the Iranian war machine.

The feeble attempt to slow Russia’s oil production by limiting its ability to export crude oil at world prices has been a failure. While Russian exports to Europe have cratered, the breach was quickly filled by huge increases in sales to China and India after the war was unleashed. China’s imports of Russian crude have ballooned from .63 million barrels per day (mbd) before the war to an average of 1.3 mbd in recent months. India’s imports were negligible prior to the onset of the war, but now average more than 1.75 mbd. The typical price discount available to Chinese and Indian importers relative to Brent crude has ranged from $37 per barrel to around $12 or $13 per barrel in recent months.

These emerging economic giants have benefited from access to a large and steady supply of discounted Russian crude to build new refining capacity and become significant exporters of refined products such as diesel, jet fuel, and gasoline. In effect, Indian and, to a lesser extent, Chinese refiners transform blacklisted Russian crude into higher-value products to supply third markets. And the profits from this arbitrage are significant: The Indian Oil Corporation has more than doubled its profits since starting this trade, and its share price has increased by 178 percent. Indian refined-product exports to the European Union (EU) alone now average over 360,000 barrels per day (bd). India can compete on price with U.S. exporters due to lower input costs, including transportation. In early 2024, U.S. refined-product exports to Europe fell by almost half, partly due to this competition.

It is also worth noting that America’s North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally Turkey has contributed to keeping Russia’s war economy from collapsing by increasing its imports of crude oil and refined products that were previously sold to Europe. It has in turn become a major exporter of refined products to the EU.

Below-market supplies of crude to China put wind in the sails of Beijing’s manufacturing-export goliath, which has become the most important engine of growth in the Middle Kingdom. In sectors such as metals, cement, and chemicals, energy costs are a significant competitive factor. The cutoff of Russian oil and gas to European markets has redistributed exports to China, which has picked up the pace of purchases since the war began. In addition to crude imports, China is the beneficiary of stranded liquefied-natural-gas (LNG) sales, which previously had gone to Europe or other Western allies. Because the Biden administration has employed a freeze on permits for new U.S. LNG export facilities and increased regulatory burdens on pipelines to get gas to existing facilities, Russian gas may partially displace U.S. LNG supply to China in the medium term. In the short term, Qatar is the main beneficiary of the Biden freeze on new LNG facilities. Europe especially has eagerly signed contracts with Doha, which now plans to nearly double its LNG capacity in the next five to seven years. Some North African suppliers have also reached deals with European nations.

A final factor worth noting is that freezing or reducing U.S. oil and gas production while tolerating Russian production, as well as increased Indian and Chinese refining and manufacturing capacity, significantly harms the global environment. Russia is one of the world’s largest offenders in the emission of methane, a greenhouse gas ten or more times as potent in exacerbating climate change as CO2. Only Iran and Venezuela top Russia in methane emissions relative to economic output. In terms of total methane emissions, China is by far the world’s largest offender, while India is rapidly catching up with its neighbor. But the U.S. and EU have far better methane- and CO2-emissions records, relative to economic output, than China and India.

The U.S. and EU price caps and embargoes on imports of Russian oil and gas have reduced the hard-dollar income from this major sector of the Russian economy — which normally accounts for 30 percent to 50 percent of Moscow’s federal budget revenues — by $30 to $50 million per day. But overall production has not yet materially affected the Putin regime. Russia has accumulated more yuan and rupees to buy manufactured goods and war materiel from China. Having access to less Russian crude and fewer Russian refined products would reduce the current advantages for the Chinese and Indian manufacturing and refining sectors, which increasingly compete with U.S. producers on the world market.

Promoting increased U.S. production would go a long way to stabilizing prices and eliminating any cost advantages to competitors now afforded by the availability of discounted Russian products. An additional benefit would be strengthening the U.S. economy and creating the jobs that the campaign strategists in the Biden administration seem to have at the top of their agenda. And even environment czars John Kerry and John Podesta should applaud the climate benefits of reducing production from the champion polluters in Russia, China, and India by substituting cleaner U.S. supplies.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-24, 05:07 PM   #7880
vienna
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Anywhere but the here & now...
Posts: 7,518
Downloads: 85
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by August View Post
Evidence of 2020 election fraud in Fulton County Georgia?



https://ballotassure.com/Reports/Georgia/2020/Fulton

Jeez, ya know, the facts just seem to keep getting in the way of the MAGA BS...


Missing 2020 poll tallies in Georgia don’t prove 20,713 votes never existed. Other records are available --

https://apnews.com/article/fact-chec...s-504105499507


It seems there were several avenues to confirm the ballots in place in 2020 and nothing, thus far, points to a massive breach in the voting process; even with the so-called 'doubled scanned' ballots in play, Trump still wouldn't have enough votes to overturn GA's final election results; as far as BallotAssure.com is concerned, the owner of the site is a MAGA/Trump diehard who claims expertise in fingerprint analysis and who appears to be one of the many "experts" who popped up after the 2020 Election to spout off their now debunked theories and claims; the owner, Phillip Davis, has no real statistical training or background that lends to him claiming data expertise in the field of election analysis; again, if there were any sound validity to these sort of claims, why don't the claimants just file suit in court and justify their 'facts' in open court, under oath, and under penalty of perjury? If they are so confident of their truth, why do they hide out behind sniper attacks on the web instead of facing those they accuse in the cold eye of the courts and the public...?...



<O>
__________________
__________________________________________________ __
vienna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-24, 05:34 PM   #7881
mapuc
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 18,040
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0


Default

Said it before-Voters on both side tried to cheat in the 2020 Presidential election.

Markus
__________________

My little lovely female cat
mapuc is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-24, 05:46 PM   #7882
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,917
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapuc View Post
Said it before-Voters on both side tried to cheat in the 2020 Presidential election.

Markus
I’m not so sure both parties willingly try to cheat. Sure there may be some voters out there that will either by mistake or willingly mishandling ballots, but I got faith in the system and I like to think our system is secure enough that such things can’t sway a national election.

But one thing you can always seem count on these days when it comes to cheating is the losing party candidate and their Lunatic Fringe fanboy’s will claim the winning party does. Hillary and Pelosi are still butt hurt over 2016, so is manbearpig Algore when he lost 2000 and now Trump. Maybe Trump really is a Democrat at heart?

What does worry me is the weaponization of the justice system going after opposition political candidates. That’s some pretty third world, banana republic, fascist, Hitler lovin’ kinda sheet.

The Lunatic Fringe motto: Long Live the Party! Those clowns are the real threat to democracy, the anti-Democratic lunatic fringe who spend their days being lead around by the nose arguing over hair color, porn stars, campaign slogans on a hat, Manchurian candidate & collusion conspiracy theories, ‘chilling headlines’, fake dossiers, legal fees, listening to late night comedy shows, pee tapes, goof balls broadcasting from their basement on YouTube and other mindless Build Back Better B.S. The stuff only fascist brains can digest believing they are the ones fighting to preserve democracy. Some going so far to declare the elected leader of the free world an enemy of the state. Those party fanboys will stop at nothing and are the real threat to our democracy.


Pelosi rebuked to her face during Oxford debate after condemning Americans clouded by 'guns, gays, God'

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pelosi-re...182359130.html

Quote:
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was rebuked as an "elite" during a recent Oxford Union debate, where she argued that populism in the United States is a threat to democracy.

Pelosi — a self-described "devout" Catholic — said during the April 25 debate that certain Americans, whom she considered to be "poor souls who are looking for some answers," refuse to accept the answers Democrats give them on particular topics due to their beliefs about "guns, gays, [and] God."

Challenging Pelosi's position in the debate about populism, Winston Marshall, a musician who was once a part of Mumford and Sons and now hosts the "Marshall Matters" podcast for The Spectator, spoke in opposition to the Oxford Union motion that "This House Believes Populism is a Threat to Democracy."

The Oxford Union at the UK's famed university holds itself as a defender of free speech, and has hosted events with numerous U.S. politicians in the past, including former Republican House Speakers Newt Gingrich and Kevin McCarthy.

Marshall argued at the April 25 debate that the meaning of the word "populist" has been changed by "elites [who] have failed" to align with their own narrative.

"'Populism' has become a word used synonymously with ‘racist.’ We've heard ‘ethno-nationalist,’ we have ‘bigot,’ we have ‘hillbilly,’ ‘redneck,’ we have ‘deplorable,’" Marshall said. Pelosi had argued in her remarks that contemporary American populism currently had an ethno-nationalist character.

"Elites use it to show their contempt for ordinary people," Marshall said.

Marshall argued that the change in meaning of the word "populist" is "a recent change," and pointed to a 2016 speech delivered by then-President Barack Obama, who he said "took umbrage with the notion that Trump be called a populist."

"If anything, Obama argued that he was the populist. If anything, Obama argued that Bernie was the populist," he said. "Something curious happens. If you watch Obama's speeches after that point, more and more recently, he uses the word ‘populist’ interchangeably with ‘strong man,’ ‘authoritarian.' The word changes meaning. It becomes a negative, a pejorative, a slur."

Highlighting the Capitol riots on January 6, 2021, which he believed to be "a dark day for America, indeed," Marshall said: "I'm sure Congresswoman Pelosi will agree that the entire month of June 2020, when the federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, was under siege and under insurrection by radical progressives, those, too, were dark days for America."

At that point, Pelosi raised her hand and said: "There is no equivalence there. . . . It is not like what happened on January 6th, which was an insurrection incited by the President of the United States."

"My point, though, is that all political movements are susceptible to violence and, indeed, insurrection," Marshall said. "Populism is not a threat to democracy. Populism is democracy. And why else have universal suffrage if not to keep elites in check?"

Marshall said he was "rather surprised" that Pelosi was arguing in favor of the motion as he thought "the left was supposed to be anti-elite" and that the "left was supposed to be anti-establishment."

"Today, particularly in America, the globalist left have become the establishment," he continued. "I suppose for Mrs. Pelosi to have taken this side of the argument, she'd be arguing herself out of a job.

Marshall went on to claim that "populism is the voice of the voiceless" and that the "real threat to democracy is from the elites."

"Now, don't get me wrong, we need elites. If President Biden has shown us anything, we need someone to run the countries," he said. "When the president has severe dementia, it's not just America that crumbles, the whole world burns."

Marshal shifted his focus to examining the elites, saying he believes that Trump should have accepted the results of the 2020 presidential election.

"So should Hillary in 2016, so should Brussels and Westminster in 2016, and so, too, should Congresswoman Pelosi instead of saying the 2016 election was, quote, ‘hijacked.’"

"It was," Pelosi interjected, drawing laughter from those in attendance.

"That doesn't mean we don't accept the results of it," she added.
.

During his speech in opposition of the motion, Marshall also took aim at the social media companies that suspended Trump from their platforms following the January 6 Capitol protests and the mainstream media.

"Mainstream media elites are part of a class who don't just disdain populism, they disdain the people. If Democrats had put half their energy in delivering for the people, Trump wouldn't even have a chance in 2024 … you've had power for four years. From the fabricated Steele Dossier, to trying to take him off the ballot in both Maine and Colorado, the Democrats are the anti-Democrat party," he said.

"Populism is not a threat to democracy. But I'll tell you what is: It's elites ordering social media to censor political opponents," Marshall said. ". . . It's Brussels, D.C., Westiminster, mainstream media, big tech, big Pharma, corporate collusion and the Davos cronies."

Delivering remarks prior to Marshall, Pelosi said, "Democracy is the rule of law, democracy is free and fair elections, democracy is about independent judiciary, it's about freedom of the press to have transparency and to have accountability of elected officials to the people."

"It's about all of that, and that is everything that the populist regime in Washington, D.C., is against," she added. "Ethno-nationalistic populism, as is the threat to democracy, is about threatening what they call elites, a free press," she said. "It's about fighting issues that relate to free and fair elections, where we have voter suppression to the nth degree under this regime and its resistance to passing the Voting Rights Act, the John Lewis Act, all of that."

At one point, while speaking about those who may consider themselves a part of the populist movement and/or are "poor souls who are looking for some answers," Pelosi said, "We've given them to them, but they're blocked by some of their views on guns – they have the three Gs, guns, gays, God, that would be a woman's right to choose — and the cultural issues cloud some of their reception of an argument that really is in their interest."

The motion debated by Marshall and Pelosi ultimately received a passing vote from those attending the Oxford Union event, 177 to 68.



Original article source: Pelosi rebuked to her face during Oxford debate after condemning Americans clouded by 'guns, gays, God'
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

Last edited by Rockstar; 05-12-24 at 09:57 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-24, 08:33 PM   #7883
Rockstar
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 11,917
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Bad U.S. Policy Has Enabled the Current Chaos in the Middle East

May 9, 2024 31 min read


https://www.heritage.org/middle-east...he-middle-east

Quote:
Authors: Brent Sadler and Nicole Robinson

SUMMARY The Middle East is aflame because of the Biden Administration’s poor policy choices. The United States must be strategic to avoid falling into another Middle East conflict. The Houthi threat in the Red Sea is a symptom of a larger problem with Iran, and to address this threat, the United States must embrace its Arab and Israeli partners to isolate Iran. Greater sanctions pressure and weapons interdiction are short-term solutions, but in the long term, America must work to strengthen the Abraham Accords in a way that creates more burden-sharing among Arab partners to address the Iranian threat so that the United States can focus on China.
Quote:
Iran’s proxy Hamas initiated a war against Israel on October 7, 2023, unleashing region-wide violence. Until Iran’s massive, coordinated drone and missile attacks on Israel on April 14, 2024, the Iran-backed Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping had been the most urgent problem for the U.S. and its allies. Between mid-November 2023 and March 2024, the Houthis carried out more than 60 attacks on commercial shipping and warships—most of which missed their target. Increasingly, however, Houthi attacks are becoming more successful.

On February19, U.S. Central Command confirmed that two Houthi anti-ship ballistic missiles struck and severely damaged a Belize-flagged, British-registered, and Lebanese managed vessel. The most recent seizure of Portuguese-flagged container ship MSC Aries on April 13 by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) near the Strait of Hormuz increased Iran’s pressure on the United States and Israel by disrupting trade through the Strait of Hormuz. After several months of U.S. and British airstrikes, the Houthis have been unrelenting in their attacks, and with renewed concerns of a closure in the Strait of Hormuz, the costs to global trade are mounting.

Acting in concert with Iran’s wider regional interests, the Houthis’ ongoing provocations aim to disrupt international trade, threaten global supply chains, and worsen historically high global inflation—economic pressures that will only drive up prices for everyday Americans. The Houthis hope that these economic pressures will incentivize America to cease support for Israel. Meanwhile, U.S. adversaries, notably China and Russia, are not subject to intentional Houthi attacks and may actually gain an advantage by their free passage through the Red Sea and Suez Canal.

This unfortunate situation was avoidable. Before this round of Middle East chaos, the Biden Administration had inherited a relatively stable region. By confronting the Iranian regime’s hostile actions and embracing partners in concert with the historic Abraham Accords, the Trump Administration was able to chart a new peaceful path forward. However, a series of poor policy choices by the Biden Administration set in motion the chaos unfolding in the Middle East today. Failing to reverse this disastrous course risks U.S. interests, dangerously distracting the United States from a potential showdown with China in Asia.



With one-third of all container traffic flowing through it, the Red Sea is one of the most important arteries in the global shipping system. Another 12 percent of seaborne oil and 8 percent of liquified natural gas (LNG) transit the Suez Canal. The Red Sea is also a major Internet choke point, home to 16 undersea cables that connect Europe and Asia and also, in addition to being used to conduct financial transactions, enable governments to communicate securely across the region. In response to the Houthi attacks, many global shipping and energy companies such as Shell and British Petroleum suspended their Red Sea routes indefinitely and are now redirecting their ships around the Cape of Good Hope. This rerouting adds fuel costs and increases demand for additional tankers to sustain trade flows. If the impacts on shipping were also to include the Strait of Hormuz, the region’s oil shipments, or 20 percent of global oil supplies, would be imperiled.

On December 18, 2023, the Secretary of Defense announced that the U.S., along with its allies, was establishing a joint maritime task force, Operation Prosperity Guardian, to defend against Houthi attacks. Although the operation supposedly brings together 20 countries, more than half of these countries have not acknowledged their participation. Long-standing allies like Spain and Italy have naval forces in the region but have not actively participated in the operation.

So far, only the United States and the United Kingdom have carried out strikes to degrade the Houthis’ military capacity to attack shipping in the Red Sea.

As Houthi attacks continue, it is clear that Operation Prosperity Guardian is failing to re-establish freedom of navigation and the safety of maritime traffic in the Red Sea.

Only an unambiguous signal to Iran will prevent escalation toward a regional war. The U.S. must impose costs on the Houthis to end their assault on shipping. This means, among other things that need to be done, restoring and enforcing the Houthi Designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). The U.S. must also degrade the capacity of Iran’s paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to sow chaos throughout the region by disrupting the flow of Iranian weapons to Tehran’s proxies. Finally, the U.S. needs to offer a more positive vision for the region by broadening and strengthening the Abraham Accords. Such actions will better ensure and sustain freedom of commerce and security against the worst proclivities of the mullahs in Tehran.

Sadly, however, there has been little indication that the Biden Administration will act accordingly. Failing to take decisive action will accelerate an already growing divide between the U.S. and key regional partners. In the absence of effective military responses, Iran and its regional proxies will continue to destabilize the Middle East, further drawing limited U.S. resources away from Washington’s most pressing threat: China.

The Economic Impact of Houthi Attacks in the Red Sea

Threats to shipping in the Red Sea compound other maritime challenges. For months, shipping has been delayed through the Panama Canal. A drought has slowed the canal authority’s ability to retain canal water depth. Added to the disruptions in the Red Sea, these pressures will accelerate ongoing efforts to harden and diversify U.S. production. Supply chain issues during COVID-19 forced some U.S. industry to onshore and near-source goods made overseas. Thankfully, the fact that U.S. markets are more reliant on trade across the Atlantic and Pacific reduces the impact of Houthi attacks in the Red Sea on U.S. markets.

There are, however, trickle-down effects from Houthi attacks in the Red Sea that drive up the costs for everyday Americans. Increased shipping costs may force wholesalers and retailers that import and export their goods to mark up their prices to maintain margins. Consumer goods, apparel, and chemical producers are particularly vulnerable sectors. It is expected that major retailers like Walmart, H&M, and Target, which rely heavily on the Suez Canal to transport goods from Asia, will be affected.14
Joe Antoshak, “Red Sea Trouble Threatens US Freight Recovery,” FreightWaves, February 6, 2024, https://www.freightwaves.com/news/re...eight-recovery (accessed May 6, 2024).
As containers and goods adjust to increased shipping costs, that effect adds to inflationary pressures here at home. Americans might first see price increases across import-dependent sectors like electronics, clothing, and gasoline.

Europe is more directly affected by attacks in the Red Sea because many European countries rely on the Red Sea for 40 percent of their imports from and 10 percent of their exports to the Middle East and Asia.15
Mark John, “Explainer: What Does Red Sea Disruption Mean for Europe’s Economy?” Reuters, January 23, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/markets​/eur...my-2024-01-19/ (accessed May 6, 2024).
Delayed shipments increase prices—both factors that worsen inflation and drive up interest rates.

Energy is another problem. Russia’s war on Ukraine has increased Europe’s dependence on Middle East energy that travels through the Red Sea, with further disruptions to either Brent crude or natural gas a major concern.

If the current Middle East crisis is not resolved soon, prices for energy and goods in Europe could increase even further.

In Egypt, Red Sea disruptions have affected “the daily influx of $25 [million] to $30 million…collected through fees from ships and additional services provided by the Suez Canal Authority.” This further stresses Egypt’s troubled economy, already straining under a staggering 33.3 percent inflation rate as of March 2024 in addition to a weakening currency and historically elevated debt-to-GDP ratio of 88.97 percent. Lost revenue deepens Cairo’s long-running currency shortage and puts pressure on President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi to make key structural reforms.

In March, after its currency plummeted, Egypt announced three economic deals: an $8 billion dollar deal with the International Monetary Fund (IMF); a $35 billion investment deal with the Emirati Sovereign Wealth Fund (ADQ); and an $8.06 billion aid deal with the European Union. These deals provide the necessary influx of cash to buy time for Cairo. Any instability in Egypt could further exacerbate Red Sea disruptions and make the movement of U.S. naval forces between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal more difficult.



China’s economy—as noted, already under strain—will face added downward pressures if attacks in the Red Sea increase in lethality or frequency. Shipping has already come under attack in the Arabian Sea, and matters would be made significantly worse if such attacks were to expand into the Strait of Hormuz. These attacks increasingly pose a dilemma for China, which sources a significant share of its energy needs from the Arabian Gulf and sizeable trade with Europe. So far, however, China, like Russia, has benefited because it is not being targeted.

Maritime shipping accounts for 95 percent of China’s exports, and the Red Sea is one of the principal trade arteries upon which it relies to ship its goods to Europe. The cost of shipping goods to Europe has more than doubled since December 2023. High shipping prices come at a time when China is trying to boost its exports to offset the effects of a real estate crisis on its economy.

China imports approximately half of its crude oil from Iran (some of which is suspected of being transshipped via Malaysia) and Gulf States: Kuwait; the United Arab Emirates (UAE); Qatar; and Saudi Arabia.

So far, the Red Sea attacks have not seriously affected Chinese trade. If Beijing managed to convince the Houthis to stop attacks in the Red Sea, the result could be to justify China’s naval buildup and global port investments across strategic trade routes. For now, the Chinese are benefitting by letting the situation play out because their ships are not targeted by the Houthis.

This “protection” gives Beijing a shipping advantage over the United States and its European partners as its trade sails through uninhibited.

For Russia, threats to the energy trade could be a strategic challenge. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Russian oil destined for Europe has been diverted to China and India, sometimes illicitly on so-called dark fleets of unregistered tankers. These oil shipments from Russia accounted for around 75 percent of southbound Suez Canal oil traffic in the first half of 2023.

Like China’s, Russian vessels are not being targeted by the Houthis. Russian oil tankers are therefore sailing through the Red Sea largely unmolested.

Despite the wider economic impact of Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, only the United Kingdom and the U.S. have conducted military operations against the Houthis. De-escalation efforts so far have failed, leaving the U.S. at risk not only of economic pressure, but also of another prolonged military confrontation in Middle East. Today’s situation was avoidable and is the product of a series of bad policy choices by the current Administration.

Biden’s Middle East Policy Mistakes

Before the horrific October 7 Hamas attacks, the Middle East was not at the top of President Biden’s action list. The Administration’s October 2022 National Security Strategy (NSS), for example, references “climate change” twice as many times as it references “Middle East.”

A year later, in September 2023, Biden’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan stated that the region was “quieter today than it has been in two decades. Weeks later, this statement would haunt the U.S. and Israel.


According to the NSS, decades of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East allegedly advanced “military-centric policies” rooted in an “unrealistic faith in force and regime change.” (The White House, National Security Strategy, October 2022, p. 42.)

To ensure stability and prosperity, the Biden Administration proposed a new strategic framework focused on diplomatic de-escalation with Iran. This approach, if successful, ostensibly could enable the Administration to redirect resources currently concentrated in the Middle East to focus on China’s threat to the Indo-Pacific.

This was the logic behind the Administration’s Iran-centered regional strategy with attempts to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal—the deeply flawed Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—playing a pivotal role.

Given the dire state of the region today, it is clear the Biden Administration’s Middle East strategy has failed. This failure is rooted in three key policy mistakes: the decision to appease Iran instead of confronting the regime, the decision to snub regional partners, and the decision to neglect the Abraham Accords.

Policy Mistake #1: Biden appeased Iran and permitted its aggressive behavior.

U.S. policy under the Trump Administration maximized diplomatic and economic pressure on Tehran by imposing economic sanctions and pushing back against Iranian troublemaking. More than 1,500 terrorism, missile, and nuclear sanctions targeted individuals and state institutions, costing Tehran over $200 billion from 2018–2021.

These sanctions impacted Tehran’s military spending. In 2019, Iran cut its defense spending by 28 percent, 17 percent of which was for IRGC funding alone. Sanctions therefore limited Iran’s ability to fund proxies like Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah.



Iranian proxy aggression was also met with strong military repercussions. On January 3, 2020, for example, the United States killed Iranian General Qassem Suleimani in response to months of attacks against U.S. forces in Iraq. This response sent a clear signal to Tehran that it would pay a high price if its proxies continued to attack U.S. forces in the region. For a while, this act had a chilling effect on Iran’s proxy attacks on U.S. forces and interests.

When President Biden came to office, however, his Administration made several concessions to appease Iran in the naïve hope that it would facilitate a quick return to the JCPOA and stop attacks by Iran’s regional proxies. Tehran demanded that Washington lift all sanctions imposed by the Trump Administration’s “maximum pressure campaign” and remove its designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. That demand, if granted, would have given Tehran even more benefits than it received under the original nuclear deal, which only lifted nuclear sanctions.

Iran also demanded that Washington guarantee that it would not withdraw from the agreement again—something that no President can promise. After more than seven rounds of indirect negotiations facilitated by Russia in Vienna, Austria, the Administration was left with no agreement. Instead, it faced an increasingly hostile Iran.

Between January 2021 and March 2023, Iran and its proxies attacked U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria more than 83 times. The U.S. responded to these attacks only four times. By ignoring the threat, the Biden Administration gave Tehran and its proxies a green light to escalate their attacks on U.S. forces and regional partners.

Even after the vicious murder of Mahsa Amini for violating Iran’s headscarf rules and the brutal crackdown on protests that followed, the Biden Administration continued its appeasement of Iran. The Administration has essentially overlooked the mullahs’ human rights violations and Iran’s destabilizing proxies in pursuit of a nuclear arms deal to the detriment of America’s relations with regional partners.

Policy Mistake #2: Biden alienated regional partners. Unlike the Trump Administration, which developed good working relationships with regional partners to confront Iran, the Biden Administration acquiesced to Tehran, hoping to entice the regime to return to the JCPOA. At the same time, the security concerns of partners such as Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE were largely ignored.

A case in point: Despite more than 20 separate drone and missile attacks against Saudi infrastructure from January to March 2021, the Pentagon announced in June 2021 that it would withdraw missile defense systems, military hardware, and personnel that were sent to Saudi Arabia and the UAE in 2019 by the Trump Administration. At about the same time, President Biden paused arm sales to the UAE and Saudi Arabia under agreements negotiated under the Trump Administration. These two decisions were not well received in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi because they left Gulf partners vulnerable to Iran and its proxies.

Unsurprisingly, the Iran-backed Houthis conducted hundreds of attacks against Saudi Arabia between 2021and 2022 and attacked the UAE twice in 2022.
Similar attacks took place prior to 2021 during the Trump Administration, but the U.S. imposed high costs on Iran and embraced regional partners. Following attacks during 2021 and 2022, the UAE and Saudi Arabia requested additional air defense support, and the UAE asked that the Biden Administration redesignate the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

Ignoring both requests, the Administration instead chose to continue talks with Iran. Then, when oil prices spiked after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the UAE and Saudi Arabia refused to take President Biden’s phone calls asking for help in supplying global energy markets.

In the summer of 2022, with gas prices high and mid-term elections pending, Biden made his first trip to the Middle East and visited Saudi Arabia and Israel. Biden, however, spent the beginning of the meeting with the Saudi King condemning Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, who was present at the meeting, for allegedly approving the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi—a major insult to the crown prince.

Saudi Arabia agreed to a nominal increase in its oil output, but this verbal commitment was never implemented. Instead, the Kingdom made additional cuts in October 2022.

After a so-called apology tour around the region and approval of $5 billion in missile defense and related sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, the Biden Administration managed to repair its poor relationships with regional partners to some degree.

With relations thus marginally improved, the Administration looked to revive the Abraham Accords with Saudi Arabia as the next signatory.

Policy Mistake #3: Biden neglected the Abraham Accords. Negotiated by the Trump Administration and signed in September 2020 by Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain and later by Sudan and Morocco, the Abraham Accords created a pathway for increased economic and security cooperation among America, Israel, and four Arab countries, strengthening their abilities to deter Iranian aggression.


From the beginning of its term, however, the Biden Administration was hesitant to embrace the Trump Administration’s successful accords. In the summer of 2021, for example, it was reported that the State Department was avoiding the term “Abraham Accords,” referring to them instead as “normalization agreements.”

Whether or not this was true, the Administration did not make any noticeable efforts to advance the accords until nuclear negotiations with Iran failed and energy prices spiked in the summer of 2022.

Following President Biden’s visit to the region, the U.S. and Abraham Accord countries established the Negev Forum as a framework for enhanced regional cooperation. According to the State Department, the forum consists of working groups focused on clean energy, education and coexistence, food and water security, health, regional security, and tourism. The only progress in this new forum was its unveiling; ministerial meetings were postponed in March and then June 2023.

At the same time, the Biden Administration has been pushing to negotiate a peace agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, but the Kingdom has driven a hard bargain. Saudi Arabia insists on a mutual security pact with the United States and the development of its own civilian nuclear program.

The attack on October 7, however, set back normalization talks. The Saudis are now demanding that “an independent Palestinian state be recognized along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capitol.

” Given the current war in Gaza, it is unlikely that any diplomatic push will move the needle toward normalization.

Neglecting the Abraham Accords was a missed opportunity for President Biden. If the Administration had embraced and strengthened the accords framework from the beginning, Saudi Arabia would have been more incentivized to join. More important, embracing the accords would have reassured regional partners of America’s U.S. commitment to the Middle East even as the U.S. shifted its attention to the Indo-Pacific to address the China threat.

The Consequences of Bad Policy

In the Biden Administration’s final year, the Middle East is on fire again. While Israel fights to defeat Hamas in Gaza, Iran and its proxies have stepped up their attacks against Israeli and U.S. forces across the region. In Iraq and Syria, Iranian proxies have attacked U.S. troops largely unopposed more than 168 times and with deadly consequences. On January 28, three U.S. servicemembers were killed and 34 were wounded in a drone attack by an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq.

As the situation has worsened, Congress has approved aid to Israel and passed multiple bills sanctioning Iranian officials and Iran’s energy sector. These congressional actions were taken after Iran significantly escalated tensions following a surgical Israeli strike on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus on April 1 that killed senior IRGC leadership coordinating the attacks on Israel.

On April 14, Iran and its proxies in Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria responded by launching more than 300 missiles and attack drones at Israel. All but five ballistic missiles were intercepted by Israeli air defense systems (Iron Dome and Arrow 3) and by U.S., British, French, and Jordanian aircraft. The attack was the first time the mullahs in Tehran had executed a direct attack on Israel from Iranian territory. Israel’s limited strike in response reduced tensions between the two for now, but the situation could escalate at any moment.

Meanwhile, to the south, global trade remains held hostage by the Houthis—one of several factions vying for power in war-torn Yemen. The Houthis are suspected of receiving assistance in their targeting of attacks by the persistent presence of the Iranian spy vessel Behshad, which has been in the Red Sea since 2021. The spy ship, however, is currently en route back to Iran, likely decreasing the Houthis’ ability to target vessels accurately.

The Houthis their attacks in April, but have since resumed attacking ships.
Because of these attacks, half of the global shipping fleet that regularly travels the Red Sea is rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope in Africa. This represents significant lost business for the Egyptian Suez Canal and is costing global shipping companies billions of dollars in additional fuel, delays, and insurance premiums.

Charting a Path Forward

Washington’s actions have neither curtailed nor diminished the impact on the attacks in the Red Sea. Sadly, the Biden Administration refuses to take concrete, material steps to shift its failed policies, apparently preferring to leave the problem for a future President. A future Administration should therefore:

Disrupt material weapon supplies to the Houthis. Since November 2023, the United States and the United Kingdom have conducted a series of targeted attacks against the Houthis in Yemen. The objective of these strikes is to degrade the Houthis’ capability to attack shipping in the Red Sea and Arabian Sea. Until weapon supplies from Iran are cut off, however, the Houthis will be able to continue attacks in the Red Sea. In international waters, in accordance with international law, all navies retain the right to “approach and visit” vessels suspected of piracy, slave trading, falsely broadcasting their flag state, or failing to fly a flag of their registered state. Additionally, the direct or indirect supply, sale, or transfer of weapons to the Houthis in Yemen violates both United Nations Resolution 2216 and international law. These authorities grant the U.S. and its allies wide margin to interdict shipping headed for Yemen. U.S. and partner navies should therefore collaborate with partner navies and regional partners to interdict arms shipments headed to Yemen and close overland smuggling routes through Oman and Saudi Arabia.

Restore and enforce the Houthis’ Designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. On January 17, 2024, the Biden Administration redesignated the Houthis as Specially Designated Terrorists (SDGT), reinstating one of the two terrorist designations put on the Houthis by the Trump Administration. The SDGT designation took effect on February 16. But not redesignating the Houthis as an FTO means that only limited asset freezes can be implemented. This additional designation would impose more significant constraints, including immigration restrictions on members of the organization simply by virtue of their membership, whereas SDGT travel restrictions are much more constrained.

The FTO designation also triggers a criminal prohibition on knowingly providing material support or resources to the designated organization. Licenses and exemptions can be drafted for both FTOs and SGDTs, but only an FTO designation triggers a criminal prohibition on knowingly providing material support or resources to the designated organization.

Potential criminal prosecution makes multinational aid organizations, international banks, shipping companies, and suppliers nervous about possibly violating U.S. laws. While an FTO designation would create a legally challenging environment for aid organizations, it would not be impossible to get needed aid to those who merit it.

Strengthen the Abraham Accords. Shying away from the Abraham Accords was a strategic miscalculation for the Biden Administration. The Accords shifted the geopolitical order in the Middle East because they set up a framework that could be used to explore new defense, investment, and political opportunities to bring together Israel and Arab partners under American leadership. A future Administration should look for opportunities to advance the collective interests of countries participating today in these Accords, notably with enhanced economic cooperation.

Given the current war in Gaza, the U.S. should explore opportunities to strengthen trade cooperation through the Dubai–Haifa “land corridor.” This proposed route would connect Dubai’s Jebel Ali Port in the UAE to Israel’s Haifa port via roads through Saudi Arabia and Jordan. This corridor would allow trade to bypass the Red Sea and sets the conditions for more regional trade agreements that encourage more nations to join the Abraham Accords. Doing so will build trust between Israel and its Arab partners and it will weaken China’s influence in the region.

Conclusion

Make no mistake: The Middle East is aflame because of the Biden Administration’s poor policy choices. The United States must be strategic in its approach to avoid falling into another Middle East conflict. The Houthi threat in the Red Sea is a symptom of a larger problem with Iran. To address this threat, the United States must embrace its Arab and Israeli partners to isolate Iran. Greater sanctions pressure and weapons interdiction are short-term solutions, but in the long term, America must work to strengthen the Abraham Accords in a way that creates more burden-sharing among Arab partners to address this threat, the United States must embrace its Arab and Israeli partners to isolate Iran. Greater sanctions pressure and weapons interdiction are short-term solutions, but in the long term, America must work to strengthen the Abraham Accords in a way that creates more burden-sharing among Arab partners to address the Iranian threat so that the United States can focus on China.

The President should have embraced the Abraham Accords and sustained comprehensive pressure on Iran. Instead, the Administration redeployed deterrent military capabilities out of the Middle East, spurned key regional partners such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, ignored attacks against U.S. troops in Syria and Iraq, eased sanctions, and released funds—all to appease Iran. Its actions have effectively enabled our top regional adversary to finance and supply its proxies that are behind all of the chaos that we see today. Moreover, the massive April 14 missile and drone attack against Israel is a clear escalation by Iran and must not be viewed as in any way acceptable. To reverse course and ultimately to keep Iran in check, the Biden Administration must embrace its Israeli partner instead of appeasing its Iranian adversary.

Without U.S. leadership, the Middle East will look for alternative partners. China is already making commercial and strategic inroads in the region. The Middle East links Europe, Africa, and Asia and is home to key commercial, communication, and energy arteries that the Chinese Communist Party relies on to sustain its economy. Taking a step back from the Middle East will open the door for greater Chinese encroachment and further elbow the U.S. out at great security and economic risk to all Americans.

Brent Sadler is Senior Research Fellow for Naval Warfare and Advanced Technology in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for National Security at The Heritage Foundation.

Nicole Robinson is Senior Research Associate for the Middle East in the Allison Center.


__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts


Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-24, 09:05 PM   #7884
Buddahaid
Shark above Space Chicken
 
Buddahaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,572
Downloads: 160
Uploads: 0


Default

Here's the 100K supporters on Jersey Beach.
__________________
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4962/oeBHq3.jpg
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light."
Stanley Kubrick

"Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming."
David Bowie
Buddahaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 12:45 AM   #7885
Reece
CINC Pacific Fleet
 
Reece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Down Under
Posts: 32,809
Downloads: 171
Uploads: 0
Default

Good grief, I had to see it to believe it!!
Don't know whether to laugh or cry!!
__________________

Sub captains go down with their ship!
Reece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 07:42 AM   #7886
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,704
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reece View Post
Good grief, I had to see it to believe it!!
Don't know whether to laugh or cry!!



Reece you're a sucker if you believe anything that Budda claims about Trump. Especially when his own candidate doesn't even dare to hold rallies in order to prevent being embarrassed by the lack of interest.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 08:13 AM   #7887
mapuc
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 18,040
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0


Default

Do not watch these type of videos, 'cause they are filled with anti-propaganda.
In this case anti-Trump propaganda. Same would be happening if it was an anti-Biden video.

I did watch them before, however everyone makes mistakes.

Markus
__________________

My little lovely female cat
mapuc is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 08:39 AM   #7888
Kptlt. Neuerburg
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,251
Downloads: 54
Uploads: 0
Default

__________________
"When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat." - George Carlin
Kptlt. Neuerburg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 10:48 AM   #7889
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,704
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Impeachment resolution introduced against Biden. The highlighted portions are lifted verbatim from the resolution against Trump.


__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is online   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-24, 02:23 PM   #7890
em2nought
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,304
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by August View Post
Impeachment resolution introduced against Biden. The highlighted portions are lifted verbatim from the resolution against Trump.


We all know that for want of a more precise word, the democrats have "better" lawyers so why not use their own words against them.

I think they may try to bring one final surprise witness, after Cohen, to point to where bad man orange hurt him.

__________________
ISRAEL: Essentially "The Alamo" 24/7, 365 since 1947
em2nought is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.