To reference images from other websites within your posts, simply right-click (desktop), or hold your finger over (mobile devices), the image and select to copy the link. You can then copy-paste this link within your post. When viewing the post, it will be automatically hyperlinked directly to the image.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 12
As Dementia Don runs like a scared rabbit from "60 Minutes" claiming they're mean to him, vice president Kamala Harris has agreed to sit for an interview with Fox 'News'.
The interview, with Fox News’s chief political anchor, Bret Baier, will take place near Philadelphia on Wednesday, shortly before it airs at 6 p.m. Eastern on Mr. Baier’s program, “Special Report.” Ms. Harris is expected to sit for 25 to 30 minutes of questions, the network said.
This is Ms. Harris’s first formal interview with Fox News, whose day-to-day programming is heavy on conservative punditry that often explicitly supports her Republican opponent, former President Donald J. Trump.Often? Umm. Shouldn't that be "always"?
Harris sat for an interview with Roland Martin and The Shade Room, an online entertainment publication, earlier today. On Tuesday, she is set to record a live interview in Detroit with Charlamagne Tha God, host of the syndicated morning radio show “The Breakfast Club.”
Last week, she sat for interviews with “The View,” “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” and “The Howard Stern Show.” She was interviewed by “60 Minutes,” as well. Dementia Don is the only presidential contender in a half-century to fail to sit for a "60 Minutes" interview... because he's afraid.
So much for the "she's hiding" nonsense.
The one who's hiding is Dementia Don.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/business/media/...
No. of Recommendations: 0
FOX will be nice to her.
Why wouldn't they be?
She's embraced FOX.
Big Oil. Big Ag, Big Pharma.
War war war
She's more FOX than MSNBC.
And Liberals are kneeling before George W Bush now. They used to hate him too ---but now they have someone new to hate :)
In the meantime, earth warms.
Good.
No. of Recommendations: 3
I think war is inevitable at this point, unless we roll-over and abandon our allies and treaties. China isn't going to back down. They are like a dog, peeing on everything and thereby marking it as "theirs". That isn't how international law works anymore. Used to be a couple hundred years ago (just ask the British, French, Spanish, and Portuguese). But that doesn't fly today.
So if we don't roll over, we're going to have to whack them (China) and toss them in the backyard to housebreak them.
But hopefully we can avoid more pointless wars (like Vietnam, which started as a French attempt to retain part of their colonial empire).
No. of Recommendations: 3
How desperate is Harris to go on Fox? Bret Baier won’t go that hard on her…but she still will struggle. And the raw video will leak out, unlike over at CBS where they deceptively editing things to make her sound coherent.
No. of Recommendations: 2
So if we don't roll over, we're going to have to whack them (China) and toss them in the backyard to housebreak them.
You say that is if it's going to be easy to "whack them". It surely won't be. I doubt China is anywhere near as incompetent and ill-prepared as Russia's military is. It simply because of distance, it will be much easier for China to invade and take Taiwan than it will be for the U.S. to defend against it, even given the close up support of the native Taiwanese army/navy/air force.
No. of Recommendations: 8
I think war is inevitable at this point, unless we roll-over and abandon our allies and treaties.
Trump will abandon Ukraine in a heartbeat seeing that they didn’t play ball with his request to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden, and because Trump is in thrall to Putin. China, seeing how loathe Trump is to do anything, will move on Taiwan and we will be powerless to stop it. We will, however, do anything for Bibi, because he’s “strong.” That will put us in the middle of conflict between Iran and Israel, but if the other Arab states are smart they’ll stay out. They’re not particularly fond of Iran anyway, and while they propagandize against Israel they’re not going to take them on, either.
Yes, if the orange one wins it’s gonna be a terrible world for a while. But not to worry, Juan who picks your potatoes will be sent back to Guatemala, so there’s that.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Trump will abandon Ukraine in a heartbeat s
No he won't. The money spigot to munitions factories won't be cut off.
They need to be running 3 shifts.
China, seeing how loathe Trump is to do anything, will move on Taiwan and we will be powerless to stop it.
China will move on China's timeline, which was 2027. There's still time if Trump wins. If Harris wins, our military will be reduced to asking what the Chicoms' pronouns are.
No. of Recommendations: 11
Yes, if the orange one wins it’s gonna be a terrible world for a while. But not to worry, Juan who picks your potatoes will be sent back to Guatemala, so there’s that.
--------------------------
I'm sensing a business opportunity for current "pick-your-own" apple orchard owners to venture into entirely new lines of business across the country...
* pick-your-own Tomatos
* pick-your-own Lettuce
* pick-your-own Strawberries
With a big enough crackdown on migrant labor, there will even be investment and franchising opportunies available for:
* mow-your-own Yard
* clean-your-own Pool
* shingle-your-own Roof
* cook-your-own Filet-O-Fish
I'm sure these will be wildly popular with Americans, knowing how rugged, self-reliant and eager to roll up their sleeves they profess to be.
WTH
No. of Recommendations: 1
You say that is if it's going to be easy to "whack them".
I didn't mean to give that impression. It will get ugly. It won't be a land war (to our benefit). China would have great difficulty landing troops in Taiwan as long as the US Navy is present. Plus Australia, possibly Japan, possibly Britain. There is an alliance gathering against China.
They could always launch missiles at Taiwan, which could then reciprocate. But occupying with ground forces will be really tough for them. Similar to how it was difficult for the Germans to invade Britain proper. The British (and allied) navy(ies) were an impediment that would have inflicted unacceptable losses. So it never happened.
Beyond that, war is relatively unpredictable. If the allies don't roll-over, they will prevail. It's a question of how much China is willing to spend. They would lose a lot of their export business because most western nations would impose a ban on Chinese products. That would probably be the determining factor as to how long China would last in a conflict.
No. of Recommendations: 1
China would have great difficulty landing troops in Taiwan as long as the US Navy is present.
They're not going to wade ashore like MacArthur in the Philippines or in some kind of D-Day recreation. They're going to slip into the country in small groups or come aboard commercial container ships, of which dozens transit the Straits of Taiwan every hour.
When the actual invasion comes, they'll first act to suppress Taiwan's air defenses, then drop troops in via air (paratroops or via airports).
No. of Recommendations: 3
It's a question of how much China is willing to spend. They would lose a lot of their export business because most western nations would impose a ban on Chinese products. That would probably be the determining factor as to how long China would last in a conflict.
A ban on Chinese products would cripple U.S. consumers. If China decides to risk it, they're best way to inflict maximum pain would be to invade Taiwan in October just in time to royally eff up the holiday season. I know you're fond of banning all Chinese products ASAP, but that is equally impossible right now, and may always be.
No. of Recommendations: 8
WatchingTheHerd:
* pick-your-own Tomatoes...Hell, how about slaughtering your own chickens and cattle?
Tyson's meatpacker division employs about 42,000 immigrants among its 120,000-strong US workforce.
“We would like to employ another 42,000 if we could find them,” said Garrett Dolan, who leads Tyson’s efforts to eliminate employment barriers such as immigration status or the need for childcare.Tyson is also investing in retaining immigrant workers, having earmarked $1.5 million a year for legal aid services in 2023 and 2024 and providing paid time off for workers to attend court hearings. Last year, Tyson paid for 1,317 workers to become US citizens.
The migrant hires and other new entry-level workers receive on-site childcare and transportation, as well as English classes for those who want them. The company is providing its new employees from New York with temporary housing, a relocation stipend and paid time off to better acclimate to their new lives in Humboldt.Gee, you guys better boycott Tyson; they love migrants.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-11...
No. of Recommendations: 0
If there is a war, the products will be banned. Total embargo. You don't continue trade with your enemy. We didn't continue trade with Japan after Pearl Harbor (and, in fact, were imposing restrictions well before that...which is part of what prompted them to attack us). It just doesn't happen.
Yes, it would hurt us, also. Hardly "cripple" us. There would be a spike in inflation as people scrambled to provide alternative sources for products, which almost certainly would be produced with more expensive labor. China will be hurt more than us, but we would feel it. China's economy is already not doing well. Ours has more resilience than theirs, at least at the present time.
What would more likely be a problem is that a lot of that trade would go through the South China Sea, which would be the battle zone. Some of it might be able to go around Mindanao to avoid at least some of the risks of sailing through a war zone. Others might have to go the other way across the Indian Ocean and around Africa (Suez isn't an option right now).
No. of Recommendations: 4
<So if we don't roll over, we're going to have to whack them (China) and toss them in the backyard to housebreak them.
If Trump wins he will bluster and bloviate and then give Xi and Putin whatever they want. He is the perfect useful idiot.
No. of Recommendations: 4
If Trump wins he will bluster and bloviate and then give Xi and Putin whatever they want. He is the perfect useful idiot.
Agreed. As I said before, he is basically an isolationist. He has very little interest in what goes on internationally, or honoring treaties (e.g. NATO), or anything of the sort. He just gets wistful when he sees the power Xi has (and he said so in public).
No. of Recommendations: 1
He just gets wistful when he sees the power Xi has (and he said so in public). - 1pg
------------
This is a mischaracterization. Trump has acknowledged that Xi puts China's interests first and that is what the USA needs more of.
No. of Recommendations: 4
This is a mischaracterization. Trump has acknowledged that Xi puts China's interests first and that is what the USA needs more of.
You left out the references to Xi ruling with an iron fist, followed by gushing over how smart Xi is.
He’s also made abundantly clear, over and over again what he’d like to do to show such strength in America- use the armed forces and justice department to round up his “enemies” here- throw them in jail and in some cases execute them for treason.
Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it…. And mre.
No. of Recommendations: 6
No. of Recommendations: 14
It won't be a land war (to our benefit). China would have great difficulty landing troops in Taiwan as long as the US Navy is present.
Hardly. China has 90% the number of ships that the US has, and is building new ones faster than we are. More to the point, the US Navy is deployed in five theaters around the world, the Chinese could easily overwhelm us by concentrating forces, similar to how we turned away Russian ships during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Worse, Taiwan is barely 100 miles from mainland China, but it’s halfway around the world from the US.
The US is never going to pull ships from the Middle East - or Europe (what with Putin playing games) so we are at a numerical disadvantage, not to mention supply lines and support. Now (for me) the question is would China play this game, and threaten or actually initiate war with the US fleet. I think yes, given their long standing belief that Taiwan is “theirs”, and the weakness Trump will show when he lets Ukraine be overrun.
Final and definitive point, Trump doesn’t see what either Ukraine or Taiwan do “for him”, therefore they are expendable.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Final and definitive point, Trump doesn’t see what either Ukraine or Taiwan do “for him”, therefore they are expendable.
And, in the case of Ukraine, he hates them for not going along with his attempt to create a fake 'controversy' that would hurt Biden. And Trump is a vindictive SOB.
No. of Recommendations: 1
It's not always quantity. It's quality, and raw firepower. Numerically, the German navy was no match for the British navy. But they spanked them repeatedly because their ships were better with more firepower.
China has 3 carriers. We have 11 (supercarriers), plus supporting vessels. We don't need to concentrate all of them around Taiwan to be sure that China couldn't invade. They may have a million man army, but they can't get them across that 100 mile straight that easily. They just don't have that many amphibious warships to transport enough troops and materiel if they meet any significant resistance (i.e. they'd lose a lot of them before they crossed that 100 miles). If we didn't intervene, they may have enough troop ships. But only if we didn't intervene.
Further, the Philippines is inviting us to station missiles and troops in the Philippines again. We are helping them expand Subic, and it appears we may be invited back.
The Aussies are on our side, as is Japan and Britain. A German warship recently made port in the Philippines. So it's not just us.
Plus, China would have to consider that attacking us would invoke the NATO treaty, and they'll be fighting all of Europe (though realistically, only the British, French, and Germans have navies for more than coastal operations).
I do agree that if the convict wins next month, it's probably game-over for Taiwan. He won't lift a finger to help them. He doesn't care what goes on over there as long as Ivanka's clothing line gets shipped out from the sweatshops unimpeded.
Probably game-over for the Philippines as well. There will be no support for resisting the Chinese taking the Spratleys, or anything else they want. The Philippine navy and coast guard just isn't up for that kind of confrontation on their own, even with Aussie and Japanese assistance.
No. of Recommendations: 3
They just don't have that many amphibious warships to transport enough troops and materiel
They don’t need amphibious warships. They have a huge fleet of RORO car carriers, as well as other “civilian” transports and barges that will be enlisted.
In fact, the gathering of these ships in Chinese ports will signal the start of a military “exercise”, that will sail up to the line of control that divides the Taiwan Strait, and then sail back to port, or sail up to the LOC and simply keep going.
We won’t know which it is… until it happens.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Hadn't thought about the car carriers. Though they need a port facility, where many amphibious craft are designed to deliver to any convenient beach. But it is an interesting scenario, and quite plausible.
We will know if it happen because the Chinese would have to bombard Taiwanese defense installations, or those car carriers will barely make it within sight of the shore. Aerial bombardment will be when we know for certain.
No. of Recommendations: 6
We will know if it happen because the Chinese would have to bombard Taiwanese defense installations, or those car carriers will barely make it within sight of the shore. Aerial bombardment will be when we know for certain.
I’m thinking the siege, not often used in modern warfare, might be the one for this. Island nation, easy to cut off from the outside world, produces only 30% of what it needs to feed its people, and has no natural energy sources to speak of.
I’m not sure how much we might deliver by air, but surely it would be a small fraction of what is needed. A marine siege would cut off the really big deliveries of foodstuffs and oil, and after that, well, who knows? I haven no idea how long a siege like this would have to last before capitulation, and perhaps in the modern era it’s a tactic that would no longer work, but it comes to mind as one that would be pretty easy to effectuate, could be relatively bloodless (absent the US Navy actually getting into a shooting war 8,000 miles from home), and could lead to a takeover without damaging much of the valuable export infrastructure, chip factories, etc. which would be the ultimate prize.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Aerial bombardment will be when we know for certain.
We'll know before that. The ChiComs will target our overhead assets (read: space stuff) first so that we've got reduced ability to see what's coming.
