Trump Brings Troops Back Home To Saudi Arabia
Monday: Want to bring back US forces engaged in endless wars: Trump
"We want to bring our troops back home. It''s been many many years. It''s been decades, in many cases. We want to bring our troops back home. I got elected on that. If you go back and look at our speeches, I would say we want to bring our troops back home from these endless wars," Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday.
Friday:
Lucas Tomlinson @LucasFoxNews - 17:50 UTC · Oct 11, 2019
Pentagon: Since May, U.S. forces have increased in Middle East by ~14,000: statement. There are currently more than 60,000 U.S. troops deployed to various countries and aboard warships.
Dan Lamothe @DanLamothe - 17:50 UTC · Oct 11, 2019
Pentagon just announced the deployment of two more fighter squadrons, one air expeditionary wing, two Patriot batteries and one THAAD unit to Saudi Arabia just now, moments before briefing with senior officials.
None of which is able to defend Saudi Arabia against another drone or cruise-missile attack.
The troop should be reminded that deployments in Saudi Arabia can end in unfriendly ways.
bigger
Posted by b on October 11, 2019 at 16:10 UTC | Permalink
« previous pageGrieved, others
Focusing on imagined insults means that an important conversation is lost in the shuffle.
History is important and karlof1 makes a good point about isolationists in the early 19th Century. But we've also got to be mindful of the differences between then and now.
Firstly, assuming international obligations was a strange concept to Americans of the 1910's. Today, USA is much more involved with the world - and has been for quite some time. And today, IMHO, the concept of "America First" - which sounds/seems "isolationist" - is not really being used to object to international obligations but to pull the wool over our eyes. MAGA is mostly propaganda for a militaristic agenda that doubles-down on Empire.
So I clarified that Trump is not an isolationist @27 and then responded to karlof1's contextual definition of "isolationism" @59 and @67 by describing my understanding that MAGA started in 2014 as a response to the challenge from Russia and China. In this view, "isolationism" of the early 20th Century is far less important to MAGA than the post-war "Pax Americana" (a powerful America as guarantor of a peace and prosperity in the Western sphere of influence).
Note: My POV is based largely on the remarkably consistent US foreign policy and pervasive propaganda operations that allow for that consistency. The notion that Trump, or anyone, can win the Presidency as a populist outsider is foolishly naive. And I've illustrated that point by pointing to Obama who was also thought to be a populist outsider but was very much pro-establishment.
<> <> <> <> <> <>
With that said, hyper-sensitivity of criticism and heated discussion is not conducive to illuminating important issues. Every criticism is not an insult.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 12 2019 3:45 utc | 102
Why has he been hounded since before his ascendancy to the throne even by his own party. And it has been relentless.I do agree that he appoints questionable people.
Posted by: arby | Oct 11 2019 19:41 utc | 42
People stuck with his Presidency are human. No one likes to be played. Everyone senses Trump is hiding something. He's just too damn defensive. Why is he taking the case about his Tax Returns to the next level, and if necessary, the Supreme Court when he already lost on Appeal? Why doesn't he just release them already and prove everybody wrong???
I don't like any side Dem or Republican, but lemme say this: Trump lies, cheats and he's conniving, and to make matters worse his ego is insatiable and he never stops bragging.
He asks for it. He's not honest therefore he attracts relentless scrutiny--action reaction.
He's to blame!
Oh and if he appoints questionable people it's precisely because he too is questionable! Birds of a feather...
Posted by: Circe | Oct 12 2019 4:15 utc | 103
@16 Don Bacon
Your logic is beyond ludicrous. Same logic as more guns are a deterrant against violence and mass shootings.
You're a real tool for Trump, huh? You'll spin anything to make him look good, no matter how ridiculous and pathetic it sounds.
Posted by: Circe | Oct 12 2019 4:29 utc | 104
Defending freedom and democracy by sending Americans to fight and die to defend the prince who chops off the heads of pro-democracy activists. Yep.
Posted by: Khosoggi | Oct 12 2019 4:55 utc | 105
"How many barflies support my contention that we have a structural problem of private versus public finance civilization war going on?" Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 11 2019 20:45 utc | 54
I am no economist, but your premise has always resonated with me because there exists a myriad of chronic societal conditions that make it obvious. Class inequality is and has always been endemic in Western society since the Feudal age. Classism as an ethos was blatant and unapologetic with the establishment of Monarchy and its associated Aristocracy. It had to retreat at the peak of the Enlightenment and the ascendancy of Republicanism, but it has since re-established itself covertly, perhaps with different names, through the vehicle of private finance. The so-called 'Deep State' are the lackeys of these moneyed interests that no longer call themselves Barons, Dukes or Kings, but constitute a secret social/class order that controls the government and decides who will be "President."
Having said that, I do not believe they are in total control and that the people are powerless. They fear the mob, with good reason. The “1%” – like the Ancien Regime – are neither all-knowing nor united. They inevitably become corrupt through their comforts, and at odds with each other. This dooms their plans. I think we are witnessing the aftershocks of a battle at the top of our social order. The details and extent of this conflict only future historians will fully know.
Posted by: Activist Potato | Oct 12 2019 5:54 utc | 107
@ Circe 102
You’re putting words into Don’s mouth and then calling him a “tool” for it. That’s unfair.
You’ve been right to suspect the worst from Trump. But, the ideas Don discussed in #16 predate the election of Trump and relating those ideas to the current alleged troop move doesn’t make Don a “tool” for Trump any more than your constant attacks on Trump makes you a “tool” for, say, the fascists in the “Democratic” Party.
Posted by: oglalla | Oct 12 2019 6:44 utc | 109
Trump running from his impeachment part 2.
After his fake Syrian troop withdrawal (US only has 1,000 troops there anyway so moving a couple hundred to KSA is newswourthy?) he now is touting his fake "majour win" in the self-created China trade war because the fake Syrian pullout gained no traction against his forthcoming impeachment, which is trending towards majority support.
Independent voters now favour Trump's impeachment. That's a bad sign for the Pres who won 2016 with less than majourity popular vote.
It was only a matter of time until Trump caved on China as I've long since predicted. I expected him to hold off until closer to election or when recession hit, whichever came first.
Throwing away his chits now indicates his panic at the growing impeachment crisis.
Posted by: donkeytale | Oct 12 2019 7:25 utc | 110
Karlof1 and Grieved
Yes yer majesties. You are so correct.
Funny, the only poster I ever recall insulting here is....jackrabbit.
Having my previous analysis wrt Turkey, Russia, Israel and US collusion in the ME proven correct in the face of massively hostile, falacious groupthink, er I mean "blog consensus?"
Priceless.
Posted by: donkeytale | Oct 12 2019 7:37 utc | 111
Sorry 47, but your arguments evaporate once you realize the whole point of putting Trump in was to allow him to play in his pen to his heart's content.
Posted by: Artful Dodger | Oct 12 2019 8:43 utc | 112
donkeytale #108.
After his fake Syrian troop withdrawal (US only has 1,000 troops there anyway so moving a couple hundred to KSA is newswourthy?) he now is touting his fake "majour win" in the self-created China trade war because the fake Syrian pullout gained no traction against his forthcoming impeachment, which is trending towards majority support.
Maybe many the voters are disenchanted with his lying, cheating, boasting, but is the Senate?
Can you please link to valid dispassionate statistics that explore the Senate and the public domain.
From my perspective I see the Democrats charging about with a blunderbuss and suffering some serious collateral damage with no guarantee they will actually bell the cat. Noise and fury is not enough with stakes this high. Sure, the dying days of the Clinton cronyist stranglehold on the DNC and the minds of some of the press and public are a spectacle to observe, but sufficient to deliver the USA to Mike Pence? Doubtful.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 12 2019 8:50 utc | 113
psychohistorian #54
I do hope they fail but they seem to have most MoA barflies glazed over from what I read. How many barflies support my contention that we have a structural problem of private versus public finance civilization war going on?
It has always been about the private vs public finance IMO. From when the commons were stolen by the lords and barons etc thus excluding the folk who relied on the commons for sustenance and wielding power over their daily lives. Today its a tad more sophisticated.
The western private finance mongrels are waging perpetual aggression against nations who exclude private western capital from their national needs. That is why there is an IMF - to wave bundles of loans under the noses of thieving or vulnerable elites and then establish con men in those countries that act as conveyors of the stolen cash to offshore havens and leave the citizens to pay the loans back. Thus enslaving that nation.
Good example:- Ukraine and the Biden family waving IMF loan guarantee under their noses and setting up vehicles to nick the cash. Hence the fury at Democrat central.
Private finance is a predatory mongrel hybrid that needs to be put down. Look at Libya to see the consequences of not putting it down. Consider China investing their own capital in MASSIVE infrastructure and not borrowing anything substantial from the western money lenders and building a public financed mechanism. And yes I am aware that it is a bubble that requires focused, rigorous control.
I am with you donkeytale on this line of thought.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 12 2019 9:10 utc | 114
I read your articles B. Appreciate your work.
I want to suggest to you and your readers that tracking the coup attempt being developed by the DeepState and the Democrats to get Trump can best be done visiting The Gateway Pundit website. That skunk Obama is getting dragged out into the light of day.
Posted by: Woodrose | Oct 12 2019 9:47 utc | 115
William Gruff #47
That was a fabulous stream and right on point. Trump is a parvenu as far as the establishment is concerned and they have had to tolerate his vulgarity as it was he who built their walled exclusive clubhouses and city estates. The establishment class despises parvenus and yet they must accommodate them until they can finish sucking whatever advantage from them they need. Trump is their current need, before that Obummer complied with their taste for the exotic.
I doubt the establishment class anticipated Clinton’s failure but then she had a nasty little turn on that fateful summer day before being strong armed into her car and rushed away. They had backed a lame horse and could never admit it.
So they got Trump who has entertained them and their fawning presstitutes by appointing an establishment list of idiots and losers and they had fun kneecapping his selection of heretic outsiders. And then first there was Comey followed by Mueller… BIG mistake. Now Trump has the temerity and power to go after some of their class who are so overcome with hubris that they will easily fall a long way and make hideous splashing noises on the clean tarmac.
I wait, with wine glass full to celebrate every head that rolls. I hope dubbya is on the list.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 12 2019 9:52 utc | 116
There's a very good reason I ignore you and donkeytale--you're two heads of the same beast, each at the ass-end of the other and unworthy of debate because you have no historical depth of knowledge.
Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 11 2019 18:40 utc | 31
I absolutely agree JR and Donkeysarse are one and the same, spot on, though which end is the head and which the arse end is not clear, it does not make any difference. Best to follow B's advice and not feed the trolls. Their only aim is to obfuscate and to lead astray.
Posted by: BM | Oct 12 2019 10:28 utc | 117
""“This is a real threat for all of us,” Putin said. “How and where will they travel? Through Turkish territory, through other territories, further into Syria in uncontrolled territory, then through Iraq, other countries. We should understand this, know this, and mobilise the resources of our intelligence services to deal with this new threat.”""
------------------
I see the US, ISIS and the Kurds in NE Syria as one big dysfunctional family. Similar to Turkey and their proxies who are fighting the current battle.
I see Russia, Iran and Syria as the adults in the room monitoring this battle.
Consider that the US and Turkey were part of getting all these anti-Assad terrorist groups together in the first place. Now I see Russia, Iran and Syria giving them a chance to fix this problem.
But Putin is fully aware that it might not work and the adults may need to step in.
Posted by: financial matters | Oct 12 2019 12:01 utc | 118
We need to settle all the takfiris in Washington DC, Riyadh, and Dubai where they will be at home. They can cut Pelosi's lawn for her, be bodyguards for MbS.
Posted by: Bemildred | Oct 12 2019 12:57 utc | 119
Gruff @ 47--
Exactly
Circe @101--
His ginormous ego is what allows him to handle the constant badgering. Most would have caved. Nothing at all to do with why they are after him.
He is like Uncle Tungsten says @ 114--
" Trump is a parvenu as far as the establishment is concerned and they have had to tolerate his vulgarity as it was he who built their walled exclusive clubhouses and city estates. The establishment class despises parvenus "
As far as his tax returns , my guess is that he does not want it to get out that he is not really a multi billionaire and most like likely only a questionable millionaire.
Posted by: arby | Oct 12 2019 13:01 utc | 120
On a slightly lighter note, satire from the Onion:
FBI Uncovers Plot to Sit Back and Enjoy
Posted by: J Swift | Oct 12 2019 13:39 utc | 121
Commenter TG @ 8...who is presumably some kind of air defense 'expert'...takes issue with B's correct statement that those US-supplied air defenses are not able to stop Houthi CRUISE MISSILES...which were the source of most of the damage...
Our resident 'expert' says...
Well, yes and no. For now these forces don't have the ability to intercept the kind of slow and low-flying cheap drones that recently hit the Saudi Oil facility.
Which proves he actually knows ZILCH...either about the actual attack itself, or the fact that 'cheap drones' can't do much damage [since they can only carry a couple of pounds of explosives]...nor can fly very far...since they can only carry a few pounds of fuel...
I have previously discussed on this forum my technical analysis of the Houthi Quds-1 cruise missile...which in fact inflicted the severe damage...and is by no means a 'cheap drone'...being comparable in fact to a Raytheon Tomahawk cruise missile...
My analysis has been picked up by a number of writers, including Pepe Escobar's recent piece in the Asia Times...
MBS must shelve his vicious war in Yemen
...where he writes...
As for the capabilities of the Yemeni Quds-1 cruise missile, here is a superb technical analysis, which comes with a crucial insight in view of the UK, German and French claims that Iran is behind the Saudi oil attacks: “Notably, the Pentagon has not accused Iran of the strike and is keeping quiet, knowing full well that the Quds cruise missile came from Houthi territory.”
But thanks for your 'expert' insight, TG...LOL
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 13:48 utc | 122
Just my conjecture here>
If one assumes that the conclusions of the expert Alasdair Macleod @ Kaeiser (E1448) on RT, which conclusions are that the US domestic economy is on the precipice of Weimar type economic collapse - that this is proximate and happening - If one assumes he's correct, then the disposition of US military forces will surely be influenced.
Since the primary designed abilities of the US military establishment is not defense, but offense, since this is primary doctrinal policy (I believe it is) the build-up in Saud perhaps ought to be seen as preparations for suppressing revolution in Saud and also for igniting war with Persia - two sides of the same coin...with whatever the cost, thus propping up the buck for a bit, 'cause of the US frakoil and a massive oil crunch in the ME. "It's a bit like mathematics" Quoth Comrade Putin. He's right, I think. And like Bismarck told us - it's like making sausage... Ugly. The aristocracy always makes war when threatened with revolt and revolution at home - in History this is the pattern, no? And the predicted Weimar Event sure would bring civil "difficulties", eh?
Pity us, we live in such times!
Posted by: Walter | Oct 12 2019 14:28 utc | 123
I may have been too brief. the logic runs that blue initiates under a ff by attacking red, then red does as promised and smashed blue force and the entire blue oil infrastructure. Thus the audience may be pursuaded to believe that red forces are responsible for the ruins and the collapsed blue domestic economy, while blue aristos screw the kiddies or whatever and remain in charge for a bit longer as oil is controlled by themselves again.
Posted by: Walter | Oct 12 2019 14:33 utc | 124
@Walter #121
Even as an inveterate doomster, I can't say I agree that the US economy (there is no "domestic" vs "not domestic") is on the verge of a Weimar style collapse.
Weimar was very rapid and due to an external force: the Versailles treaty reparations. The IMF takedown model used in Argentina, Greece and other places could legitimately have originated in Versailles: saddle a nation with an enormous foreign currency debt. Create a death spiral where domestic consumption is reduced by austerity, in order to pay said debt denominated in foreign currency. Austerity causes the economy to shrink and the exchange rate to worsen, thus forcing even more austerity.
The Germans figured out how to hyperinflate out of it - but even then there were consequences: it is rarely retold how France and Belgium occupied the Ruhr valley, seat of German industry, for 2 years between 1923 and 1925 because of defaulted Versailles reparations payments, for example, and just took stuff. To be fair, a significant or possibly dominant reason was the US forcing these countries to pay back their war debt.
In any case, my point is that the US does not have an external debt denominated in foreign currency problem.
The actual problem in the US is an economic domination by the banksters: austerity due to local/family/individual debt, which is causing consumption to fail, which in turn causes the heavily consumer purchasing based US economy to falter, which in turn spirals back in the form of no wage increases and job losses.
Or put another way: the problem in the US is entirely solvable, internal and fully within the power of the US government and people. A hyperinflation (100% inflation over 1 year or up to 4 years) would actually significantly help, *if* wages kept up.
And there's the rub: such a hyperinflation would literally take money from the uber-wealthy - which is why it isn't going to happen until the stranglehold of the uber-wealthy is broken.
A large reason for the reduction in inequality in the US from WW2 to the 1950s was precisely due to inflation. Look at the monthly inflation numbers from 1941 to 1951 here. Note how inflation rates were 2% to 19% per month, with the exception of 1949 to early 1950.
Wages, definitely during WW2 and likely during the post war era, kept up with inflation but the inflation eroded passive wealth across the board.
One of the greatest lies - on par with "Satan doesn't exist" type lies - is the uniquely American middle and upper middle class notion that anything which hurts the uber wealthy, hurts them. It is the basis of both the left "meritocratic" nonsense and the right "libertarian" nonsense - both examples of said groups defending the interests of their wealthy overlords because they think they're all the same.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 14:53 utc | 125
Great comment by William Gruff @ 70
So Americans are supposedly wealthier, only with less material goods. Then what is this additional wealth, spiritual or something?...No, the additional wealth is imaginary...Real wealth production has been declining in the United States since the early 1970s.
I looked briefly at the comical article you linked to which tries to defy logic by saying that the economy keeps growing...but with 'Less Steel, Paper, Fertilizer, and Energy...'
LOLOLOL...
In fact this is now part of a trend of trying to push this gravity-defying explanation...dubbed 'dematerialization'...
If you do a search for instance on energy and GDP you find all kinds of bogus articles and 'papers' on this phenomenon...where industrial societies are continuing to 'grow'...but actually using less 'stuff'...[and this, incidentally, is great news for the environment, since less stuff means less pollution...]
Now I suppose that the Pavlovian lab mice that make up the big part of the general population are so conditioned by the decades of consuming official pabulum that they will probably buy this latest farcical 'explanation' for the state of decline they see with their own eyes in their personal lives, their communities, and everywhere around them. Or at least that is the hope...
Now energy consumption is obviously tied to economic activity in an obvious way...if you have more people and they are making and consuming more things, then that requires more energy use...
But guess what...the United States of today, with 50 million more people than in 2000 is using the same amount of energy...
In 2000, the U.S. consumed a total of 98.8 Quadrillion BTU’s (Quad BTU’s) of energy to produce $10.6 trillion in GDP.Amazingly, in 2017, the U.S. only burned 97.9 Quad BTU’s to generate $19.4 trillion in GDP.
So the economy has DOUBLED on the same amount of energy use...?
And I guess tomorrow we will all ride our unicorns to work at the Smile Factory...?
The fact is that for at least more than a decade, Paul Craig Roberts has been exposing the scam in detail...the manipulation of 'official' inflation figures, by means of substituting cheaper alternatives in the basket of goods...or counting 'quality improvements' as not being inflation...etc...
So with bogus inflation, naturally the GDP 'growth' is bogus as well...since it must outpace the rate of inflation...
Now here is the graph for China energy use and GDP growth...moving up in lockstep as per logic and basic physical principles...
The complete article is here...
Why U.S. GDP Hasn’t Really Increased Since 2000
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 14:58 utc | 126
Not only is Trump reshuffling some troops from Syria into Saudi Arabia but he's sending 3000 additional troops to Saudi Arabia along with all kinds of heavy weaponry.
the Pentagon announced that the deployment will include a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, two Patriot batteries, two fighter squadrons and one air expeditionary wing
Now he's deploying 3000 US troops
Despite the bullshet excuse that Don Bacon and other Trump-can-do-no-wrong tools provide here this is yet another perfect example of Trump giving on promises with one hand to take away much more with another. Trump is 100% in MBS's corner on Yemen, Iran and SYRIIIA! He's doing Zionist bidding. His strategy is give LOUDLY only a little to take back QUIETLY a whole lot. He does this with everything! He's a con! A loudmouth snakeoil salesman. He's the best bullshitter ever chosen surrounding himself with pond scum like Rudy. Don Bacon sells him like he's the second coming! It's all a repackaged populist con.
Posted by: Circe | Oct 12 2019 15:00 utc | 127
@flankerbandit #124
You've touched on, but not really drilled into the reasons why the "real" economy - as seen by 90% of Americans - hasn't improved even as GDP as doubled.
The answer is very easy: banksters and financialization.
Wages for 90% and below of Americans is literally flat to down for at least 20+ years, after accounting for official US inflation numbers. If actual inflation is higher, which I do agree with albeit not to the Shadowstats extent, then wages are definitely down.
But, banksters create GDP from suffering. A family with 200% debt to income ratio is generating much more GDP in the form of interest payments than a family with no debt.
The family with no debt can afford to buy more stuff - which drives job and income growth, but the GDP impact of purchased imported crap is much lower than said interest payments: 100% red blooded American (vampirically drained).
So the disparity you see is a result of 2 things: financialization/banksters first, American manufacturing offshoring second.
Ironically, the rise of US shale oil production has changed the above dynamic, on the production side, but it is far from clear that this is enough.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 15:05 utc | 128
@ c1ue 126
I was going to mention also the role that the extractive finance sector plays in this...
The FIRE sector [finance, insurance, real estate] has grown tremendously as a portion of GDP over the last 40 years...now making up about a third of GDP in western countries...
In fact, these rentier activities should be subtracted from GDP, not added to it...as real economists like Prof Michael Hudson point out...
So yes, that is a big part of it too, as you point out...
Offshoring of production is another factor...this is part and parcel of labor arbitrage...which also includes importing cheap labor as immigration...you will note that both parties including Trump are big on LEGAL immigration...
Just recently he made an incredibly stupid statement about how 'we need more people'...because the economy is allegedly so 'strong'...
The point of both of these labor arbitrage strategies being to drive down wages and income of ordinary folks...thus they have less money to spend to buy the things they need...
Henry Ford paid his workers twice the going rate because he realized that workers need to be able to afford to buy the cars he was making...this is in fact a very logical and 'socialist' perspective that no longer exists in the finance capitalism of the west...
Bottom line is that the stated GDP and its supposed growth has been a fiction for quite some time...
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 15:42 utc | 129
f @ 127
Apparently old Henry had a change of heart later on.
https://www.carthrottle.com/post/dolzbz7/
Posted by: arby | Oct 12 2019 15:51 utc | 130
Also at c1ue about shale oil...
Ironically, the rise of US shale oil production has changed the above dynamic, on the production side, but it is far from clear that this is enough.
It's hard to take this seriously...
Most analysts are quite troubled about the long-term prospects of fracked shale oil...the industry has been riding on low-interest debt and is highly leveraged...
Little known is the fact that despite all technological advances and economies of scale, the USA shale oil industry as a whole has yet to turn a net profit.
...writes William Engdahl
The New American Oil Empire Built on Sand
Those shale wells are very capital intensive because they deplete very quickly...
Now though, we are seeing the first clear signs that the “shale boom” could implode even faster than it rose.The implications for American foreign policy and global geopolitics and economics are significant.
In any case, your argument that increased US energy production [from whatever source] somehow offsets the fake GDP figures does not hold water...since hydrocarbon energy is just one part of total energy use as measured in that report I linked to...
The simple fact is that economic output requires energy, also including electric, nuclear etc...
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 15:58 utc | 131
@ arby RE Henry Ford...
Thanks for that link...I agree with you...a capitalist will revert to form sooner or later...wasn't trying to make the anti-Semite Ford into some kind of saint...but he did get things right at the beginning at least...
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 16:02 utc | 132
@flankerbandit #127
Agree with everything you said.
I would only a couple things:
1) Henry Ford paying his workers. This is a bullshit story on many levels. Here's some data on what actual union scale wages were in the US in 1913. Note how "structural iron workers" wages in Michigan (page 102) were $0.60 per hour. Wow, that's $4.80 per day for an 8 hour day (and the report says average hours worked was 48 per week). Was Ford *really* paying that much more?
Also: Ford's production line workers were the equivalent of web programmers in Y2K and data scientists now: he was paying them a lot because the skill sets needed were scarce and in demand in 1913. Let's not forget, there weren't a lot of people experienced in building machinery in 1913 - outside of harvesters, there just weren't a lot of machines, period, and we're talking about machinery plus internal combustion engines - also really new.
2) Legal immigration isn't the issue. The real issue is that the workers among the 90% are exposed to competition at home and abroad, but the 10% workers (lawyers, doctors, dentists, etc) are not. These occupation groups are protected by legal and credential walls just as much as pharma companies are protected by patents. Funny, that. /sarc
3) Offshoring. Offshoring is significantly about labor arbitrage, but also about regulatory arbitrage. Safety, environmental pollution, taxation, the list goes on and on. The desire to offshore is perfectly understandable and reasonable. What is not understandable and reasonable is US government policies permitting, and even encouraging it - because offshoring literally hurts the US tax base and economy. This is where the money and politics comes into play.
I greatly respect Dr. Michael Hudson and have learned (and continue to learn) immensely from his publications and work. However, he is more than a little naive on the role self-interested enrichment played in forming American society. He has talked about how junk economics has been promoted by different economist spokesmodels (I mean you, Krugman), but - to my knowledge - has never delved into just how deeply the oligarchy funds and promotes these mainstream junk economics ideas because of how it furthers their own interest.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 16:06 utc | 133
The zionist puppet Trump sending troops to fight for greater Israel.
Posted by: DESERT FOX | Oct 12 2019 16:08 utc | 134
@flankerbandit #129
Sorry, but a pundit like Engdahl doesn't understand shit about oil production and its economics. I don't pretend to either, but I've talked to people who work in the oil industry - according to them, shale oil works just fine. (they aren't in shale, they're in offshore oil so aren't talking their book but are talking about direct competitors).
The industry overall is losing money, but that's because the flood of cheap investment funds has enabled a large number of operationally incompetent companies to operate in that business.
These companies hurt not only themselves; the economics of oil are such that the price of oil isn't even the majority factor in profitability: it is the cost basis of production. When oil prices are high: oil drilling rigs, oil workers, housing in new oil production areas (think North Dakota), fracking sand, water, analysts and analytics - everything gets super expensive because everyone wants it.
Shale absolutely exaggerates this - you correctly note that shale oil produces less per well and requires more wells per acre than conventional.
The incompetent companies suck up supply for all of the above. They cause the oil production side costs to be higher for everyone just by simply existing - hurting the companies that actually do know what they're doing.
So yes, the overall shale industry is losing money, but there are players within it that are cash flow positive despite the cheap money fueled leeches hanging on their asses. If and when these leeches go out of business, the correction to overall industry operations will be significant.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 16:16 utc | 135
@ : c1ue | Oct 12 2019 14:53 utc | 123
It's not my opinion, you must understand - it's the guy in the interview. Generally I agree with you expressions about Weimar, but he spoke of the effect of the inflationary collapse, not the cause - the political effect of the inflation. I think he's naive if we read David Irving (despite his personal nature a fine researcher)
I have letters in German from a great aunt who lived through the Weimar inflation - daughter of a wealthy Frankfurt family. She's repeating the antisemetic propaganda line of the nazi machine. They're hard to read. She blames the ordinary working class Jews for everything...and praises the nazis for the momentary "stability"...and so on..
My assumption was that if he's right, then this would naturally affect the disposition and action of expeditionary force, and their strategy. That's my topic.
Threatened Aristos tend to start wars and blame the enemy, is this not a pattern we see in History? It seems to them the best path toward retaining power.
Let us hope for the best.
Posted by: Walter | Oct 12 2019 16:21 utc | 136
shale oil works just fine.
The planet runs on diesel, which shale fails at miserably.
But you can produce gasoline, if blended usually.
The US doesn't have refinery capacity for thin shale, so most has to be exported.
And building new refineries is a losing proposition.
Posted by: Duncan Idaho | Oct 12 2019 16:24 utc | 137
this thread really got derailed and it is not the usual suspects... such a disappointment..
Posted by: james | Oct 12 2019 16:47 utc | 138
Duncan Idaho @135: Yep, that's why we want to get Venezuela back under control, lots of good heavy oil to blend with. The fracking craze is political, we want to be kings of the oil bidness again, so it can be 1950 again, we remember it well. Any chance will be taken, money will be printed as needed, until we get rid of these selfish assholes and their stupid plans. Take their money, take their power. They have been fucking things up here since 1621.
Posted by: Bemildred | Oct 12 2019 16:50 utc | 139
@Walter #134
Fair enough.
I will note, however, that in the case of a US hyperinflation - reaction to inflation will be at least partly a function of how the government treats it.
It doesn't seem like people had any problem with the 286% inflation in 1942 (i.e. prices went from $1 to $3.86).
IMO, this is evidence that inflation itself isn't the issue; it is wage growth vs. inflation. And again, Weimar was an externally induced hyperinflation while an American one would be internally induced (just like 1942).
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 16:50 utc | 140
@ c1ue...
So Michael Hudson is 'more than a little naive'...
And William Engdahl who has an engineering degree from Texas and has been a respected energy analyst and author for decades 'doesn't understand shit about oil production and its economics...'
Well...I guess we're lucky to have you here then, to set us all straight...thanks muchly...
Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 16:51 utc | 141
@Duncan Idaho #135
Again, I don't pretend to be an expert on shale oil, uses etc. If all the "regular" oil goes to diesel and shale goes to the rest, it still works out.
A quick Google search turns up this graph - which implies diesel is the largest sector of oil use but only 27%-28% of overall demand. Given that shale is probably producing less than 15%, maybe less than 10% of world oil consumption - doesn't seem like an issue.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 16:54 utc | 142
Hopefully the new Patriot batteries will work better than the existing ones that totally failed to stop the "Iranian" attack from Yemen that used Yeman copies of Iranian missiles.
Posted by: Vonu | Oct 12 2019 16:57 utc | 143
6 -
You could also argue that MAGA never materialized because it was really a con to get small businesses to take on more unsustainable Credit-Debt. Trump's 'tariffs' were just an illegal Fed VAT, to backstop steep Fed tax revenue declines (and crack-spread a slush fund). Trump's Huawei shot across the bow, together with those tariffs, had the fully intended consequence of China abruptly pulling out of USA equities and bonds. And which, together with Pompeo-Bolton's Iran saber-rattling tanker-ransoming few-fah, caused the capital-bleeding-out saltwater-pumping KSA to join in a 'domino-effect' in USA equities and bonds.
Global Central Banksters could use that $128B 'Not QE4' liquidity to position themselves to buy up the soft equities and bonds fire sale, in advance of what everyone at retail level is wishing and hoping and praying will be a redux of 1984 The Microchip That Saved Ronald Reagan, or 1996 The Internet That Saved Bill Gates: the 5G Revolution. That's the nature of Capitalism, to corner plays, and chase margins and momentum, the way lions chase springbok.
Everyone senses it. Everyone knows deep down. Even the Common Man. Those $100s TRILLIONS of deeply underfunded and sagging-market-trapped Government pension funds can have only one outcome: Government will inexorably and inevitably loot the last unencumbered wealth on Earth, the Boomer generations' 401ks, after which, all wealth will be lock-boxed, doled-out like Christ's wafers to supplicants. So you're going to start hearing the word 'compulsory' more than any time in your life.
Big Silicon's compulsory 5G pernicious sub-microwave radiation at street level, like Big Pharma's new compulsory FrankenDNA vaccines, like Big Education-Scientocracy's compulsory Cloud-Based 'Given Wisdom' schooling-as-brainwashing, and likely compulsory 60%-75% US tax regime by Big Government to pay for all that Free Schtuff, together with the known and predictable compulsory Energy Austerity Regime, are just five of the Wonderful Compulsory Futures That Await Us.
Then comes the hearse after midnight, the cardboard coffin and the crematorium. Arbeit Macht Frei!!
Posted by: Jack Martin | Oct 12 2019 17:03 utc | 144
I am also with Karloff, Graff and Grieved. I am sure totally sick of the TDS trolls, both those commercial ones and the purely cretenic ones. As the election approaches, I have switched to checking out who the poster is before reading.
It would be terribly naive, to quote a troll here, to assume that these supporters of trolls are anything but sock puppets belonging to the infestation.
This is still one of the best zines in the World, most of all because of its audience. You trolls should ask for extra bonuses for fooling any fringe of the audience here because it is so hard to fool the core. I feel a bit like Moses pushing an ocean of sewerage to two sides to be able to access the really sensible comments, but it works, no matter how active the polluters are. A few days ago there was one filthy troll who did not bother with sock puppets and made almost 1/3 of all the comments.
Posted by: Kiza | Oct 12 2019 17:06 utc | 145
@flankerbandit #139
A pundit isn't an operational analyst.
The facts I set out were provided by someone who actually works in the industry - and independently validated by further research.
But since you believe Engdahl is such an expert, let's look at the article he wrote.
He writes that:
1) The overall industry has yet to turn a profit. Well, duh. If you have a large number of incompetent idiots driving up your own costs as well as losing ridiculous amount of money themselves, the result is certainly going to be overall industry losses. We don't have to take shale oil in isolation: we have the Uber/Lyft/taxi individual transportation industry as an example. Uber has lost $10B plus since it was created and multiple billions per year. Lyft, several more billions and a billion plus per year. I guarantee that the taxi industry didn't $4B plus annual profit prior to Uber, and the net annual profits of the entire sector are unquestionably negative now.
2) Engdahl then relies on EIA projections of profit to show that the shale industry is worse than expected. Again, duh. The cheap financing and refinancing of shale oil players is still going on. Given the factors I was told above, it is 100% consistent.
3) Under reporting of wells - again, given the number of incompetents out there, nothing would surprise me.
4) Decline rates, etc etc - I actually believe this to be true, but this doesn't itself automatically mean shale cannot be profitable. Engdahl's article itself says:
The actual drilling of a shale well is only about 30-40% of the total cost. Up to 55-70% are from completion which includes actual fracking.
But what is not mentioned is just how much the cost actually varies. If 55% to 70% of cost is operational today but the costs change by factors of 300% (which is what I was told), then it isn't hard at all to see why production costs as a function of supply/demand pricing is a vital factor in profitability, and why a bunch of clueless losers could drag down the whole sector.
Essentially the entire report is based on other people's high level analysis, not any actual specific expertise on Engdahl's part - so his credentials are irrelevant.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 17:11 utc | 146
If Trump had told the SDF in advance that he was going to pull their US protection and that they should do a deal with Damacus - realistically the best of a number of shitty options available to them, can you imagine the outcry against Trump? As it is, there will be some gnashing of teeth and then most of the so-called progressives (corporate Democrats, etc.) will get on with the futile effort to impeach Trump because they really don't give a fuck about anything outside of the United States.
On the otherhand, that part of my brain that considers conspiracy theories wonders whether this is a scam against the takfiris/jihadists. Erdogan has a problem (I prefer the word opportunity but that is too management speak for me) with too many takfiris/jihadists on the loose in Turkey that he needs to clean up. What better than to send them into northern Syria to fix them in place then the Russians and Syrians with perhaps SDF support fire up the SAA Meat Grinder™ one more time. End of Erdogan's problem. What an opportunity!
Posted by: Ghost Ship | Oct 12 2019 17:12 utc | 147
@flankerbandit #139
As for Michael Hudson: his prescription for fixing the problem is to boycott the elections and kill the Democratic party, then start a brand new one.
This is naive because the Democratic party is only the symptom.
Let's not forget, the Democrats built their chops on being the "poor people's advocate" in American politics. That changed over time with money, and the sources of money as well as the people involved in the DNCC, state level Democratic organizations, etc don't just disappear even if a magic wand could make the Democratic party disappear.
You can't make all those livelihoods, power and people voluntarily walk off stage, much less the mind share that generations of messaging has left with the population.
Secondly, what would a string of Republican Congressional and Presidential incumbencies mean for the American political process, while this new party is being formed?
We're not talking about loading a new software program on a computer. Changing hearts and minds is difficult and takes a lot of time.
Personally, I see an actual revolution happening first - after the existing power structure turns the US into a literal banana republic.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 17:17 utc | 148
Dims and Repugs are both capitalist-
Pepsi, Pepsi Lite
A very small perspective,
Posted by: Duncan Idaho | Oct 12 2019 17:36 utc | 149
"Naive" is the least accurate adjective I've ever heard used to describe Michael Hudson. "Finance as Warfare," "Super Imperialism," the other books and articles referred to and linked to here, especially by karlof1, and he's naive? Have you read anything he's written?
Posted by: spudski | Oct 12 2019 17:45 utc | 150
Is there a Turkish-Russian coordination going on? Bhadrakumar thinks so. Several commenter on this site have expressed a similar opinion as well
https://indianpunchline.com/a-turkish-russian-entente-cordiale-in-the-making/
Posted by: Nathan Mulcahy | Oct 12 2019 17:45 utc | 151
flankerbandit | Oct 12 2019 16:51 utc | 139
Two thumbs up!
Posted by: spudski | Oct 12 2019 17:46 utc | 152
I did a bit of searching around for news and more info, and one thing I noticed right away and the only thing I want to add to this discussion is this tidbit on the narrative
and here are the headlines and snip-its from some news articles to show the Narrative. (Since I don't know how to highlight, I have gone in an put the keyword/s in CAPITAL letters myself.) The narrative of course is that all these US measures are purely defensive, that it is Iran which is the clear aggressor. And of course left unsaid is that the US has done nothing over the past decades to create or exacerbate tensions and injustices in the Middle East. The blanket uniformity of the media perspective and coverage are indicative of an overarching imperial propaganda narrative.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/world/middleeast/trump-saudi-arabia-iran-troops.html
Trump Orders Troops and Weapons to Saudi Arabia in Message of DETERRENCE to Iran
https://www.defensenews.com/news/your-military/2019/10/11/f-15s-air-defense-systems-and-thousands-of-us-troops-heading-to-saudi-arabia/
"...Esper said. "We thought it was important to continue to deploy forces, to DETER AND DEFEND, and to send the message to the Iranians: Do not strike another sovereign state, do not threaten American interests or forces, or we will respond...."
https://www.vox.com/world/2019/10/11/20909932/trump-iran-saudi-arabia-troops-esper
The Trump administration will send nearly 2,000 troops and advanced military equipment to Saudi Arabia to DETER threats from Iran...
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/10/11/us-troop-deployment-saudi-arabia-starr-crn-vpx.cnn
"...because the US Navy is unable to send a relief aircraft carrier to DETER potential Iranian aggression, multiple US officials tell CNN...."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/us-to-send-additional-troops-to-saudi-arabia-to-boost-defenses-against-iran/2019/10/11/7b8c8de6-ec42-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html
The Pentagon will deploy an additional 1,800 troops to Saudi Arabia, senior defense officials said Friday, a modest increase in the U.S. military’s presence in the Middle East meant to DETER Iranian aggression.
Posted by: michaelj72 | Oct 12 2019 17:48 utc | 153
And let's add to Michaelj72 @ #151:
Trump says that Saudi Arabia is paying for everything the US is sending their way to "help" with "deterrence against Iran", which includes paying the troops. This makes US soldiers ipso facto mercenaries hired by a foreign nation.
"[...] Trump said the United States would not bear the expense of the deployment. 'Saudi Arabia, at my request, has agreed to pay us for everything we’re doing,' he told reporters. [...]"
Cool, Erik Prince must be beaming with pride at his protege. And at least we aren't pretending anymore. Whoring ourselves out to the highest bidder - HOO-rah!
Posted by: teri | Oct 12 2019 18:13 utc | 154
@145 ghostship.. that is how i see it.. some deal was cut to help erdogan with the headchoppers he doesn't want back in turkey..
@ 151 michael.. ''deters the iranian aggression''.. does that bullshit sell in the usa?
152 teri... it does look like that...
Posted by: james | Oct 12 2019 18:33 utc | 155
I still think Trump's buildup of troops in Saudi isn't going to work. Trump and his lot are completely blind to the danger. Support for the regime in Saudi is weak. The surrender of "three brigades" to the Houthis the other day is only the recent evidence. People accept the regime for the money, but Trump is planning to have Americans parading about. That won't go down well. Saudis are very sensitive on the issue of Islam in the Muslim Holy Land. Their state was built on jihadism. Khobar Towers, a type of attack at risk again, was done by Sunni Jihadis, who received a lot of support in the country. Trump is planning to confront Iran. That will be just defending the regime. Isolating the regime (MbS), and weakening its support, is a likely consequence.
Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 12 2019 19:09 utc | 156
@151 Nathan Mulcahy.. thanks for pointing out the indian punchline article.. it is a worthwhile read for others here!
@156 laguerre.. ultimately trump-usa moves are a positive result if you last sentence is accurate..
Posted by: james | Oct 12 2019 19:14 utc | 157
Posted by: james | Oct 12 2019 19:14 utc | 157
Overthrowing the Saudi regime, much as I dislike them, and the inevitable breakup of the country, will have very serious consequences for oil production, and thus for the world economy. I won't say catastrophic, because even successful rebels understand that oil has to be got out. But there may be quite a cut. Might even lead the world into buying Iranian oil.
Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 12 2019 19:44 utc | 158
Almost everything the US does in the ME is for the benefit of Israel. Israel is not too happy with the Turkish incursion into NE Syria to deal with the nascent Kurdish state, and some within Likud party (Gideon Sa’ar, one of Netanyahu’s rivals in the Likud party) "denounce Turkish actions and should provide the Kurds with help.". (just crocodile tears?) Just how that would be accomplished is anyone's guess. After all Israel supporting the Kurds pushes their plan on diving up Syria. Ayelet Shaked, leader of the Yamina party and justice minister, said, “The Kurds are the world’s largest nation without a country, with a population of about 35 million people. They are an ancient people that share a special historical connection to the Jewish people. I'm not sure what the historical connection the Kurds have with the Jewish people? Nomads that desire to steal land from Arabs perhaps? The Pentagon knows full well that Iran didn't launch the attack on Saudi oil facilities and that as b noted the recent deployment wont help defend against a similar attack. This deployment and all the fanfare with it looks like to me to divert attention from the Turkish invasion of NE Syria to sabre rattling against Iran. Even Pompeo didn't seem to take his eye off the ball of Iran is the cause of all the problems in the ME.
Posted by: Tom | Oct 12 2019 20:12 utc | 159
More lies by Trump to the American public as reported by Reuters
"
RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia’s king and crown prince have approved the deployment of additional U.S. troops and equipment, after an attack last month on the kingdom’s oil facilities, state news agency SPA reported on Saturday.
The United States announced a deployment of about 3,000 troops to the Gulf state, including fighter squadrons, an air expeditionary wing and air defense personnel, amid heightened tensions with Saudi’s arch-rival Iran.
President Donald Trump said the Saudis had agreed to pay for the deployment. The SPA report said only that it came in the context of “historic relations and (a) well-established partnership” between the two countries.
"
Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 12 2019 20:31 utc | 160
@spudski #150
I've actually read all of his works.
Dr. Hudson is a professor and an ex-industry economist.
He's never been in government nor have any of his policies ever been put into play.
There's a huge difference between what is possible on paper vs what gets done.
If we're talking about his understanding and explaining what is/has being done - this is documenting what's there and he's great at it.
Actually creating policy, getting it adopted, and ensuring it stays on target is a very different thing. That's one difference between Dr. Hudson and say, Bill Black - who actually prosecuted real control fraud crimes in the RTC regime, post Lincoln 5/S & L collapse.
Just because Dr. Hudson is awesome at describing what is being done does not automatically equate to the same capability at prescribing a remedy.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 12 2019 20:42 utc | 161
c1ue | Oct 12 2019 20:42 utc | 161
I take issue with the use of the word "naive." I guess we have different dictionaries.
Posted by: spudski | Oct 12 2019 20:56 utc | 162
The problem with the Americans in Saudi is that as long as they are few, they can be hidden, eating steaks from Texas, and nothing local. With Trump's plan, they're going to be in yer face. People are going to have to make a choice.
Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 12 2019 21:03 utc | 163
This is a wonderful website. From right here at MoA dated August 19, 2016: "No ISIS There - Are U.S. Troops In Hasakah "Advising" Kurds To Attack The Syrian Army?" b said this: "Syrian government forces are attacked by Kurdish troops who are "advised" by U.S. special forces. According to the U.S. spokesperson the Syrian air force is not allowed to defend them? What has this to do with "fighting ISIS" in eastern Syria which is allegedly the sole reason for U.S. troops being in Syria?"
Posted by: spudski | Oct 12 2019 21:18 utc | 164
Laguerre | Oct 12 2019 19:09 utc | 156:
Khobar Towers, a type of attack at risk again, was done by Sunni Jihadis
Maybe that's the idea and then pin it on Iran. Plan C. If the boys in DC can't goad Iran to respond to their liking then they'll find someone else to do the dirty work. Once the shooting starts, it won't matter what the truth would be.
Posted by: Ian2 | Oct 12 2019 21:24 utc | 165
Wonder how long before they get hit by an Israeli missile fired apparently by Iran?
Posted by: PB | Oct 12 2019 21:46 utc | 166
Laguerre "With Trump's plan, they're going to be in yer face."
You are right with that. When asked about Libya, Iraq and Syria, Trump says "we should have grabbed the oil". I take it he is in Saudi land to grab the oil, though according to a recent reuters piece, the Saudi's are pay for the US to be there. Will be interesting to see which way this develops.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 12 2019 21:58 utc | 167
Laguerre
Another thing to keep in mid is Trump's public humiliation of MBS on several occasions, one time stated Saudi Arabia would not last two weeks without the US. He may think the Saudi's are a pushover.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 12 2019 22:01 utc | 168
@Tom#159
Israel helped Turkey for many years in fights against the PKK.
Hafez Assad, Bashar's father, supported the Kurds. And he sent some of them to Lebanon in 1982 to fight with the Palestinian Resistance against the Israeli invasion.
But it looks like now the Izzies are worried. They know that Erdogan is changing Turkey into an Islamofascist state. They are probably pressing Mr Bone-Spurs to get a cease fire between Turks and Kurds. Might be too late though. The PYD is telling the US to leave so they can ask Assad and Putin to help them against Erdogan.
Posted by: mike | Oct 12 2019 22:04 utc | 169
Yesterday's news remains today's reality. A solid critique of Trump and his master - the Deep State:
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 12 2019 23:01 utc | 170
The Marxists are often quite good at analysis, I have seen. Hence this remark at WSWS caught my eye, and seems relevant to topic> "With the latest buildup of US forces in Saudi Arabia, Washington is preparing, behind the backs of the working class, to launch a catastrophic military conflict with Iran"
see" US sends 3,000 more troops to defend Saudi monarchy" WSWS dot org
They always double...
Posted by: Walter | Oct 12 2019 23:23 utc | 171
Canthama has provided a long string of very recent updates you can read by clicking link and scrolling down to read them all. Manbij will be cleared of Outlaw US Empire troops by dawn and replaced by Russians then SAA. Many other excellent nuggets. I expect major changes to occur by Monday.
Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 13 2019 0:01 utc | 172
Yes, it surely seems some different perspectives need to be canvased. I linked to one major paper produced under the auspices of the Valdai Club on several occasions that elicited nary a comment. Here's another. Neither attempts to portray Trump as good or bad; rather, they try to discover what he embodies, shorn of the massive amounts of spin coming from all directions and from Trump himself. That is a task academics worth their PhDs do prior to making moral judgments. Maybe it ought to be discovered why the so-called Deep State hates Trump so badly it wanted to impeach him before he was even elected.
Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 13 2019 0:41 utc | 173
karlof1 "Neither attempts to portray Trump as good or bad; rather, they try to discover what he embodies, shorn of the massive amounts of spin coming from all directions and from Trump himself."
It is what I have attempted to do.
At the moment, and for some time, I have thought he needs to be looked at as a businessman in a world with no rules. Nobody can hold US to account. Mafia style businessman.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 13 2019 0:53 utc | 174
@ Peter AU 1 who wrote
"
At the moment, and for some time, I have thought he needs to be looked at as a businessman in a world with no rules. Nobody can hold US to account. Mafia style businessman.
"
Absolutely! The latest thread about Boeing leadership not being held responsible for the deaths of hundreds is another data element to your point of "Nobody can hold US to account."
Them that own the money system make the rules and are never made responsible for their perfidy
Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 13 2019 1:04 utc | 175
Now I go to bed with these prophetic words from Magnier - “This (US) administration has damaged substantially the US relationship with the region for many years to come. Other allies are imposing themselves with much lower expectations than the US. Once the US leaves Syria, its decline will be irreversible”.
Posted by: Nathan Mulcahy | Oct 13 2019 2:26 utc | 176
@170 uncle tungsten
Thanks for the link. Still reading it, but the first dozen paragraphs seem very good. Just getting to the meat now, the one true reason that the vested interests are at odds with Trump...
~~
@172 karlof1
Thanks for the Canthama link. Still reading but the first couple of comments by him offer really good news. Somehow I fell in love with the Syrians and their army of patriots, my heart leaps to hear of their potential successes.
~~
#173 karlof1
Thanks for the re-link on the Valdai piece. I wasn't going to read it - because who has time? - but in light of your finding nary a comment in response, I started to look at it, and yes, it's going to be good. I will read it and with thanks - but I don't know if I'll manage a "nary+1" to change your response rate. The Mathew Ehret piece I've considered twice today but was going to pass. At your suggestion I will now read it.
As to when I get all this done, see all of the above to note my current reading list, and that's just from the tail-end comments of this thread.
You must continue to be kind to those of us who are not yet retired, and keep offering your links and executive summaries, and never get disheartened if no one has time to respond, so busy we are with the reading therefrom.
~~
@176 Nathan Mulcahy
Oh sure, it's one more link - and this time it's Magnier so how can I stay away ;) Thank you very much for sharing the link and the quote. Enjoy your night of sleep. I'll think of you as I'm catching up with all these links...
Posted by: Grieved | Oct 13 2019 3:47 utc | 177
Looks like Corbyn's done it again.
“The behaviour of Turkey in invading the Kurdish area is absolutely appalling.”
@jeremycorbyn calls for economic sanctions against the Turkish state.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1182722087854718977
@ 158 laguerre... thank you.. we'll see how it all unfolds..
@ 164 spudski... thanks for saying that.. i agree with you..
@ 165 ian2... yes, false flags from the exceptional nation/empire are always a possibility..
@179 uncle tungsten.. good read.. thanks.. here is the quote i liked from the article..
"Trump’s fatal mistake was saying that he wanted to get along with Russia, that Putin was a good leader, and that he wanted to end the war against Syria and pull the U.S. back from foreign wars. This was verboten. And when he said nuclear war was absurd and would only result in nuclear conflagration, he had crossed the Rubicon. That sealed his fate. Misogyny, racism, support for Republican conservative positions on a host of issues – all fine. Opposing foreign wars, especially with Russia – not fine."
i am not convinced of this, although it is a pretty good sounding argument, it is also a great political tool to be used by any potential future politician to reach and hold the office of president... trump has been selling this for some time, but is he really backing it up with his actions? i just don't see it, but i appreciate the quality of the snake oil... and it is a good sales pitch to say the deep state has been out to get him since before he was elected too... in fact, i see this as a flaw in the usa political system where the leaders are not really in control of the direction that the good ship usa is sailing in.. thanks for sharing the article regardless of my skepticism of the main selling points of the article...
@ 172 karlof1.. thanks for the link.. interesting info... should be able to see the results of the eastern syria info canthama has shared fairly soon.. regarding your link @ 173, i have read a good chunk of it when you linked to it in the past.. in fact, i was listening to some translated russian interviews along the very same line from a few years ago that were speaking along the same lines.. as i said to uncle tungsten in the link he provided, i am not convinced of the specifics on this cat and mouse game that is being defined as ""trump verses the deep state"", although it helps maintain the trump fan base... in fact, i think the usa is fucked regardless whether they have trump or someone else at this point... the usa is in a state of real decline.. trump is the guy sitting on the presidency when the shit is hitting the fan and there is no return to normal for the usa anymore... even if he is removed, the usa has dug a hole for itself deep enough to not get out of here.. so, this cat and mouse - trump verses deep state show is beside the point as i see it..
@176 nathan mulcahy with ej magneir article... the key quote that plays into canthamas comments in the link karlof1 provied...
"The Syrian Kurds and the Arab tribes have not been “anti-Damascus” since the beginning of the war imposed on the country in 2011. Moreover, the Syrian Army and its allies maintained until today a large force in Qamishli, including the airport itself. Therefore, the relationship with the inhabitants of the region never ceased. Therefore, it would be possible for Damascus and its allies to supply the Kurds with much-needed weapons and plans to form an insurgency against the Turkish forces and their proxies, in case Ankara decides to replace the US forces and occupy the enclave." we'll see how this unfolds very shortly, if this is it..
Posted by: james | Oct 13 2019 5:27 utc | 179
@178 russ... corbyn would be pilloried if he said anything different..
where is bevin lately??
Posted by: james | Oct 13 2019 5:29 utc | 180
@ James 180
Corbyn is pilloried no matter what he says. If you think he's only engaging in attempted appeasement here, the way he's done with the "anti-semite" smears, that means he's a complete idiot. Only an idiot doesn't know that you can't appease enemies who are simply out to get you. Is that what you're saying, that he's an idiot?
(And of course your interpretation doesn't bode well for any notion that Corbyn is honest and says what he believes. You're saying he's lying for tactical political purposes. IOW same as every other politician.)
Meanwhile I don't doubt that's his real pro-war pro-imperial position. Any Western politician, even the "best" of them, the second their whim doesn't like something it's "sanctions! sanctions! sanctions!" As we see, Corbyn just as much as Trump.
(I'm not saying this to be "pro-Turkey" or "anti-Kurd", but to be anti-sanction, and against all who call for them and support them, as I am in every case.)
Flankerbandit
The economy IS an energy equation,money USED to be a unit of net energy.
You're halfway there, the hidden decline is about EROEI, its no longer high enough to support 'civilization' and declining rapidly.
We are eating our seedcorn as a species.
Posted by: winston2 | Oct 13 2019 12:07 utc | 182
@ : c1ue | Oct 12 2019 20:42 utc | 161 (about M. Hudson's "policies" not being tested as such)...
well, yes, but this depends what one means by "policies" (or remedies)... It seems to me that Hudson's policies have been tested in several ways ...for one he tells us that he made a personal fortune of some significance by applying his policies to his own benefit. But the same Marxist theoretical principles have been tested in other States, at least generally. Of course this has been done only approximately and also under the assault of both internal and external capitalist forces. I would suggest that Marxist theories have been tested, and Hudson's ideas are Marxist...
Marxist Theory in application did (and does) quite a lot for people, and also it produced great technical progress...and also it produced Comrade P, whose Soviet education and background seems to be giving the fatkatz conniption fits. It also kept America stable by keeping the pressure on the fatkatz... SU and US were a pair in dynamic equilibrium.
The treason of the SU leadership, if we call it such, resulted in the collapse of both SU and the US, which is ongoing...and brought the US treasons of 911...which made clear the objective reality - collapse and desperate war-making.
If the SU had followed Marxist Theory better, would their treason have occurred? Did Marxism fail in SU? These are questions....
Posted by: Walter | Oct 13 2019 12:12 utc | 183
@ 181 russ... i am not following it closely, but all i read is bad press on corbyn and your post is no different..whether this is given the fact the media can only share negative stuff on corbyn, or that corbyn is indeed very negative - i can't tell...
Posted by: james | Oct 13 2019 16:43 utc | 184
James 184
I posted a clip showing him calling for sanctions. You think I made that up? It looks cut an dried to me, and I've long since had it with the vile West and its sanctions onslaught. It means: "Globalization is a great thing because, among other things, we dominate it and therefore can wage war by sanctioning anyone who misbehaves from our POV." As we see here, Corbyn is a typical Western politician in having fully assimilated this predatory mindset.
Meanwhile the corporate media doesn't have "negative stuff" (from their POV) to show except for directly attacking his proclaimed program, which they can't really do since it's too popular, which is why they can only engage in scurrilous editorializing and lies such as branding him an anti-semite. (Though as I mentioned, he abets them by striving in vain to appease them.)
Posted by: Russ Bangs | Oct 14 2019 6:02 utc | 185
@Walter #183
First, I would caution against the fuzziness you are displaying regarding Marxist politics and Marx's economic theories: They're not the same thing at all.
Karl Marx was an economist and paid little to no attention to politics except in a very long term and utopian sense. His analysis was that Capital would oppress industrial labor workers so much that eventually there would be a revolution.
The sad reality is that an industrial labor proletariat revolution has never occurred. Neither the Soviet Union, nor China, nor Korea nor Vietnam were industrialized nations.
Marx's politics have never actually occurred in nature, so far, so how can they be proven or unproven?
Marxist politicians, however, advocate socialist/redistributionist policies. This has nothing to do with Marxist economics but rather political positioning.
Second, I use the term naivete deliberately. Dr. Hudson is an idealist, and he views people idealistically. The failure of the Soviet Union, the ongoing failure of the American political system are both examples where human nature trumps ideology.
For the Soviets, they successfully raised the USSR from a 3rd rate, non-industrial nation into a 2nd world industrial one. They created a society which didn't run on money: money existed but it really didn't matter for anything important. The USSR increased literacy rates, drove roughshod over ethnic divisions (admittedly with the help of significant relocation and deaths), rebuilt after both WW1 and WW2, and made Russia a top tier military and scientific nation and a 2nd tier economic one.
But instead of progressing from there, they became increasingly inefficient due to the bureaucrats taking the place of capitalists as apex leadership.
In a society where primacy wasn't because of money, bureaucratic influence was literally king. To paraphrase Jurassic Park: "personal empowerment will find a way".
How does Dr. Hudson address this fundamental problem arising from human nature?
Then let's look at the US. For all the reality of oligopolic power plays, the United States did start with a radical core of anti-royalty (*not* democracy), technically republicanism. Remember, in 1776, Western Europe and the rest of the world was pretty much entirely feudal/royalty based. Compared to a King, the Central Committee US Senate is very enlightened. Of course, since then the US Senate has become worse than any Communist Central Committee as it turns itself over less frequently. Look at the China and Russia politburo membership over time vs. the 80%+ reelection rates for US Senators.
The Citizens United based corruption we see is 100% logical: in a society where success is based on money, it is inevitable that money will find a way to dominate power more directly.
And again, how does Dr. Hudson's prescriptions address this fundamental issue?
But these are very high level - let's look at some much more specific ones.
Dr. Hudson has talked about infrastructure investment as a way to improve the economy. Specifically, he advocates raising local property taxes to tax away the property value increases stimulated by the construction of mass transit, as one example. A house next to a new subway station increases radically in value because of its walkability and attractiveness to people commuting to work - assuming the subway connects somewhere central.
Has this ever been implemented, anywhere? Has any form of tactical property tax increase ever been implemented anywhere? To my knowledge, never, because the people who own property will never allow it.
The only real world examples of such anti-profiteering/anti-capitalist/anti-oligarchy type pushback are the nationalizations of various oil/other industries by nations - and those are arguably straight confiscations, not new "laws".
Even what we see today in American politics is nothing compared to Europe. Most of Europe isn't solidly 2 party like the US, but the center-left and center-right parties in all of Europe are literally Janus - 2 faces of the same coin. The fact that these groups have to cooperate all the time has led them to basically think and act alike - which is why the far right groups are on the rise: they're literally the only parties that actually listen to people vs. each other.
The only reason this is happening now (i.e. in the last generation or 2) in the US vs. before is because of a handful of great men:
Andrew Jackson crushing the 2nd Bank of the United States, and thus pruning back the banksters.
Theodore Roosevelt getting elected on a wave of insurance campaign contributions, but then backstabbing his sponsors by passing laws to prevent that from happening again.
FDR going against his own class, because he believed that revolution would either come under the oligarchy's terms or on the oligarchy's heads on spikes.
Will there be another such hero? Sure doesn't look like it.
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 14 2019 20:42 utc | 186
I think the president is doing his best against all odds. Under Obama 1000s of generals were sacked. Who were they replaced by? Given enough time and who knows what Trump will do. Great things? I think maybe. But, right now he's navigating through the minefields laid by his predecessors. Our best hope is Trump in 2020.
The comments to this entry are closed.
Turkish artillery near U.S. base
Apparently there are 1000 troops in Syria. 1000, 500, 5000....ahhhh, who believes shet anymore when Trump has made lying the new truth! Trump is a bullshet virus and all low resistence weak minds have become infected. I mean many of you!
Posted by: Circe | Oct 12 2019 3:33 utc | 101