It isn’t ‘anti-democratic’ to bar Trump from office. It’s needed to protect democracy

submitted by /u/zsreport [link] [comments]

from Politics https://ift.tt/tlvObzu

RINOs In Denial Over Donald Trump While Democrats Are Flailing

Normally I choose not to bore my international readers with U.S. domestic politics but I must make an exception tonight in light of Donald Trump’s crushing victory in the Iowa caucus event. The Republican establishment went all out to put a dent in Trump and failed spectacularly. Neo-Con Nikki Haley is the fav of the Republican aristocratic effetes who cannot stand the smell of Trump supporters. The country club set just cannot bear to be associated with the unwashed masses who lionize Donald. For that reason they poured millions of dollars into an organized effort to knock the Trumper off of his bandstand.

Nikki Haley came in third, trailing my Governor, Ron DeSantis, by a few percentage points. But her numbers are misleading. The Democrats, who are acquiescing so far to letting pedo Gramps Biden run for a second term, were encouraged to turn out and caucus for Haley. The Dems are desperate to sink Donald Trump. They failed in Iowa.

Donald Trump enjoys one major advantage over Nikki and Ron — his foibles, his weaknesses and his failures are widely known. There is no new dirt on him. Nine years of excavation and fabrication have turned up nothing. If anything, the relentless persecution of Trump has made his more popular with the middle and working class.

The same cannot be said for Nikki or Ron. Neither has been subjected to the vivisection that Trump has endured since he first declared for President in 2015. The frantic, desperate efforts by the Clinton and Obama sycophants to paint Trump as a racist, Jew hating, Commie lover have failed. Trump is still very popular with his base and turns out crowds that neither Haley nor DeSantis could corral if they were offering attendees at their ralies a $1,000 bucks per person.

This is the heart of the problem — wealthy people dominate the leadership of the Republican (and Democrat) party. They live in a cloistered realm and have convinced themselves that they have their hands on the electorates pulse. What they don’t realize is that they are grasping their own tiny cock in their lobbyist greased fingers. They have no clue what working stiffs are feeling or believe.

Trump is not backed by fair weather poofs. These are some hard-ass people. They stood in line for hours in sub-freezing temperatures being pelted with snow and sleet. Show me one other candidate who could attract a crowd like this under these conditions.

The Trump Derangement Syndrome crowd are still hoping that Neo-Con Nikki can make a good showing in New Hampshire’s upcoming primary. Not likely. She is not a nice person and that attitude comes through loud and clear in her public events. More troubling is her almost fanatic commitment to embroiling the United States in more endless wars overseas. The Americans who have kids of military age who would have to pay the price for her delusions of grandeur have no stomach for putting John McCain in a skirt in the White House.

Trump’s speech on Monday night in the wake of his commanding victory was surprising to many. He left the attack dog at home and spoke in measured tone that was conciliatory and complementary of his opponents. He looked and sounded Presidential. If Trump wins in November he will owe Joe Biden one big fat thank you gift for turning America into a shit-hole and transgender nightmare. Most Americans want safety and normal, not fear and perversity.

Which brings me to the Democrats. They are trying to figure out how to rid themselves of Biden before it is too late. Rumors are swirling that Michelle Obama is going to emerge as the surprise replacement for Biden. Some Dems are giddy over that prospect. Talk about delusional. Michelle has done nothing to prove her political chops. She has not delivered an electrifying speech like her husband did that catapulted him into the limelight. She is not a charismatic person. Her show on Netflix was a bomb. Frozen potato salad in an Eskimo igloo would attract more flies than Michelle.

More challenging is the fact that many black Americans realized they were bamboozled by her smooth talking husband, who did not do a damn thing to improve the lives of black Americans, especially those trapped in the slaughter houses known as the inner cities of Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, New York and Oakland. In fact, there are a growing number of black Americans who long for the days when Trump was President. During his term black employment rose.

There is another group of neo-Democrats, they have dubbed themselves as “NO LABELS.” They are irony challenged because they do not grasp the fact that “NO LABELS” is a label. This group is comprised of old school Democrats, like Joe Manchin and Joe Lieberman. Their plan is to trot out an alternative candidate in late winter or early spring and sincerely believe they can select a candidate in their vape-filled conference rooms that will magically rally support. They are betting the house that their mystery candidate will wield sufficient clout and draw voters from Trump. I think the opposite will happen. They are more likely to split the Democrat vote and make it easier for Trump to win.

There is a legitimate fear that Biden is going to start a war that will be used as an excuse to shutdown the 2024 election. If that happens, America will be torn in half and its ability to wage war will founder. That is why we need to pay close attention to what is going on in Ukraine, Gaza, Yemen and Iran. One very smart political analyst (a new friend) wrote the following to me this morning:

Why did Biden remove the Houthis from the terror list and then at the slightest provocation attack them without giving himself the political cover?  In my world it’s because he and the real people running this administration want to break down the barriers between the branches… undermine the structures that are supposed to stop this type of behavior.

It’s vandalism, pure and simple.  The target here isn’t Iran or the Houthis or anyone else. The target is us.

I fear he is right. That said, Donald Trump is no longer a naive celebrity riding a wave of popularity. He is battle hardened and scarred. What the Democrats and the Trump haters do not understand is that their relentless attacks on him are making him stronger, not weaker. Trump’s refusal to curl up into a fetal position and cry for mercy is pissing them off and confounding them. I suspect Trump secretly hopes they do not stop because he understands that creates a viable path for him to return to the White House. Bidens clumsy performance and destructive policies has rekindled a genuine longing for a return to the Trump era. We’ll see.

READER INTERACTIONS

The post RINOs In Denial Over Donald Trump While Democrats Are Flailing appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

from The Gateway Pundit https://ift.tt/K0uwgsS

ABC Just Canceled Thursday’s Planned GOP Debate

submitted by /u/prohb [link] [comments]

from Politics https://ift.tt/ieWwQfg

Trump Wants CNN, NBC Off Air for Spurning His Iowa Victory Speech

submitted by /u/Unable-Finance-2099 [link] [comments]

from Politics https://ift.tt/RF38Ohd

Gorsuch urged to recuse himself from supreme court case over ties to oil baron

submitted by /u/newnemo [link] [comments]

from Politics https://ift.tt/a0qGyOn

Western Academics Do Not Understand Russia And Its Military — The Fabian Hoffmann Example

A friend flagged this X-Twitter thread by Fabian Hoffman to me the other day because it attracted a lot of neo-con attention and cheerleading. Prior to this I had never heard of Hoffmann. I can’t tell if Hoffmann is Dutch, English or Norwegian. Here’s his bio, you tell me:

Fabian Hoffmann is a PhD Research Fellow at the Oslo Nuclear Project. His PhD research focuses on the proliferation, deployment, and use of non-nuclear strategic weapons, in particular conventional precision-strike capabilities, and their implications on nuclear strategy and broader nuclear weapons policy (e.g., nuclear proliferation & disarmament). . . . Prior to joining the University of Oslo, Fabian Hoffmann worked as a research assistant at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). He holds an MA in War Studies from King’s College London, UK, and a BA in International Relations from the University of Groningen, The Netherlands.

I am taking the time to focus on Hoffmann’s “analysis” of Russia as a military threat because it illustrates the ignorance predominant among Western scholars. This man’s critical thinking skills are quite weak and his lack of any military experience adds to his failure to grasp the real issues. I am reprinting the entire thread for your ease of reading. Here goes:

In this thread, I will explain why we are much closer to war with Russia than most people realize and why our time window for rearmament is shorter than many believe. In my opinion, we have at best 2-3 years to re-establish deterrence vis-à-vis . Here’s why 1/20

One common mistake in analyzing the threat posed by Russia is falling into the trap of ‘mirror-imaging’. This means assuming that Russia views a potential conflict with us in the same way we view a potential conflict with them. Nothing could be further from the truth. 2/20

In addition, it is important to be cautious about extrapolating too many lessons from Ukraine & assuming that a war with Russia would unfold in a similar manner, albeit on a larger scale. In reality, a war between NATO & Russia would likely take on a different form altogether. 3/20

Russia does not plan for the type of large-scale conventional war with NATO that we are currently seeing in Ukraine & for which we are primarily preparing. Already before taking substantial losses on the Ukrainian battlefield, Russia knew that it would be inferior in such a scenario. 4/20

Russian thinking on a war with NATO revolves around the concept of escalation control and escalation management. Russia’s primary objective in a war with NATO is to effectively manage escalation and bring the war to an early end on terms that are favorable to Russia. 5/20

Terminating hostilities early is necessary, given that Russia must secure a victorous outcome before NATO’s conventional superiority comes to bear, most notably that of the United States. Two key concepts play a crucial role: de-escalation strikes and aggressive sanctuarization. 6/20

Rather than comprehensively defeating NATO in a prolonged ground war, similar to what we see in Ukraine, Russian doctrine suggests that Russia would attempt to coerce NATO into submission by signaling the ability to inflict progressively greater amounts of damage. 7/20

This would entail, in particular, long-range strikes against critical civilian infrastructure across European NATO countries early on. The message to NATO governments: Don’t come to the support of your Eastern European allies, unless you want to see your population suffer. 8/20

Simultaneously, Russia would extend its nuclear umbrella over any NATO territory it managed to capture in an initial assault. This sends a second message: Any endeavor to retake that territory, particularly by external NATO forces (USA), will result in nuclear escalation. 9/20

The psychological fear of escalation, which may ultimately result in unacceptable damage, is supposed to open the door for negotiations about the future of NATO and the security architecture in Europe – of course, on Russia’s terms. 10/20

This type of warfighting scenario is not a contest of forces, but primarily a risk-taking competition. The question becomes: Who will be the first to back down when confronted with the prospect of largescale war, including potential exchanges of strategic nuclear warheads? 11/20

As Cold War historians know, the balance of military power is not deterministic of outcomes in risk-taking competitions. Instead, they are often determined by the balance of resolve; i.e., the relative willingness to remain steadfast even as risks are increasing. 12/20

This is why Russia pursues this type of strategy. Russia does not need to match NATO’s conventional power. As long as NATO gives in first amid mounting psychological pressure due to a lack of resolve, Russia can walk away with a victory. 13/20

Here’s the thing: The ongoing war in Ukraine is teaching Russia a crucial lesson – that the West lacks resolve. Domestic disunity and endless discussions about escalation only reinforce Russia’s belief that NATO will back down when push comes to shove. 14/20

This means Russia does not have to wait until its conventional power is reconstituted. Scenarios where we have 5-10 years to rearm following the end of the war are way too optimistic, in my opinion. 15/20

I am with the Eastern European states that we have at best 2-3 years from today to re-establish a credible deterrence posture vis-à-vis Russia. Otherwise, we run the grave risk that Russia is going to challenge us, sooner rather than later. 16/20

NATO must credibly deny Russia the ability to seize any substantial part of NATO territory or to threaten strikes against NATO critical infrastructure. This is needed to escape the coercive conundrum that aggressive sancturization and de-escalation strikes pose. 17/20

We must also have a serious discussion not only about how to deter a war with Russia but also about how to fight one. Are we prepared to retaliate against Russian critical civilian infrastructure in case Russia strikes ours first? How do we react to Russian nuclear first use? 18/20

Our lack of preparedness, both in the physcial space but also in terms of our cognitive ability to think through these scenarios, is encouraging Russia. Since 2014, Russian intellectuals have debated extensively and publicly how to win a war against NATO. Where is our debate? 19/20

What we need, especially in Europe, is whole-of-society effort to get our affairs in order. There’s no denying that this will come with a significant cost, but I fail to see any other viable option. Considering worst-case scenarios, as we should, time has already run out. 20/20

Let me highlight some of the biggest flaws in Hoffmann’s analysis. Let’s start with Hoffmann’s claim that, “Russia does not plan for the type of large-scale conventional war with NATO . . . [because] Russia knew that it would be inferior in such a scenario.” This is ridiculous. Russia’s military already has demonstrated that it is three steps ahead of NATO planners. You know, the Western clowns who conjured up Ukraine’s sure-fire counter-offensive victory that ended up decimating the Ukrainian army?

Russia absolutely has planned for having to deal with a large-scale conventional war with NATO. It is NATO that has failed to properly plan for dealing with Russia. NATO leaders foolishly convinced themselves that Russia’s army is led by incompetent drunks and staffed by criminals snatched from prison. Big mistake.

 

Hoffmann’s next mistake is that he still believes NATO has a conventional force advantage over Russia. He insists that, “Terminating hostilities early is necessary, given that Russia must secure a victorious outcome before NATO’s conventional superiority comes to bear.”

Hoffmann has not been paying attention to what has unfolded on the ground in Ukraine since February 2022. Not a single NATO weapon system has proved to be superior to what Russia has fielded. Himars, Patriot batteries, Leopard and Challenger tanks, and Bradley fighting vehicles have been effectively neutered. NATO has no air defense system comparable to Russia’s 49 year old S-300. To add insult to injury Russia employs superior electronic warfare and has hyper-sonic missiles.

Apart from superior battlefield weapons, Russia has a manpower advantage. Russia is smaller in terms of population than the combined NATO countries, but it is providing standardized training to soldiers that share a common cause — i.e., defending the motherland. NATO? It is a hodgepodge of different nationalities who have no unifying cause other than a hatred of Russia, which is rooted in racism. On top of that, most of the major NATO countries are struggling to meet recruitment goals.

Almost forgot. The war in Ukraine has revealed that NATO countries no longer have the military industrial capability to produce the volumes of artillery shells and combat vehicles and air defense missiles needed to fight Russia. Russia’s industry is running on all cylinders and cranking out prodigious quantities of ammunition, tanks, aircraft, combat vehicles, missiles, rockets and drones.

Hoffman is not alone in believing that NATO represents a superior military force compared to Russia. He is a prime example of the delusion that pervades Western military leadership. The West is preoccupied with LGBTQ and pronouns. Russia is busy training and equipping warriors. Ask yourself, would you rather have a division of Chechen fighters or a unit cobbled together with Germans, Swedes, Finns, French and Spainards? I rest my case.

The post Western Academics Do Not Understand Russia And Its Military — The Fabian Hoffmann Example appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

from The Gateway Pundit https://ift.tt/y2xPfUJ

Kamala Harris warns US freedom is under ‘profound threat’ in MLK Jr day speech

submitted by /u/911_reddit [link] [comments]

from Politics https://ift.tt/LZtb12f