Sandals in Yemen could "see" and fire missiles at US f-35 stealth fighter jets, and the F-35 had to maneuver sharply to avoid being hit. The F-35 then abandoned its mission and retreated away from yemen.

10 years ago Nut&Yahoo sent f-35 to bomb Damascus airport and Assad used Soviet legacy S-250 system and did in fact shoot down an israeli f-35, and the israelis claim it was a bird strike that destroyed the F-35. note: it was then that Putin ordered Assad to not shoot down israeli planes and the Russians integrated the Syrian air defense network into the Russian air defenses network. Not to make the Syrian system better, but to be able to stop the Syrians from shooting down israeli planes. (Putin wanted the ability of Russian/Soviet air defenses to remain secret)

The Chinese are helping Yemen as much as they can without making it outright public knowledge (trade to/from Yemen has no taxes or restrictions of any sort, and that may include military technology and hardware!)

Also, did you notice the Chinese systems Pakistan used in its action against India seemed to work very well!

If the Pentagon thought it was gonna sneak up on China with F-35 and slap them around, now the Pentagon knows that would have been a one way ticket to hell for the US attacking force.

The F-35 program should be abandoned with reckless abandon! By the US, and by the rest of the world who was thinking of using them. The chances of India buying F-35 now are slim and none, and Slim just left town!

Posted by: Hot Carl | May 18 2025 12:44 utc | 1

I remember being quite depressed when Switzerland committed to $6Billion in F-35 purchases, thinking at the time they should have bought French or Swedish, now it
appears it should have been Chinese!

Posted by: SwissArmyMan | May 18 2025 13:27 utc | 2

Hot Carl | May 18 2025 12:44 utc | 1
…The F-35 program should be abandoned…
Au contraire. The yank warpigs should do what they do best, double down and triple down. More! More funding and fubar with the F-35s.
And I say that as a vassal who is paying tribute by buying a fking fleet of these flying bricks

Posted by: Melaleuca | May 18 2025 13:32 utc | 3

Hot Carl @1: "f the Pentagon thought it was gonna sneak up on China with F-35 and slap them around, now the Pentagon knows that would have been a one way ticket to hell for the US attacking force.

Precisely this, though I think many in the Empire have not yet really internalized just how hellacious that hell is going to be. The Empire might still have some technological advantages around the edges, but that doesn't translate to superiority of military tech. "Old" large military institutions tend to be very conservative and slow to adopt new ideas. This isn't just because those institutions are ruled by stodgy old fossils, but rather because so much is invested in existing standards and procedures. The US military has mountains of highly detailed instruction manuals and formal documentation of procedures, all developed over decades (centuries, even!) and carefully integrated across disciplines and duties. Training programs at bases and academies likewise have traditions dating back centuries that only change incrementally and based upon proven doctrine. Any big changes not only risk unexpected and unintended consequences, but require replacing mountains of manuals, retraining many thousands of instructors, and then certifying that the new paradigms are in place, understood, and being effectively imparted to the troops and personnel who need to know and internalize those changed procedures. Change in big and old military institutions is a non-trivial problem. Just mentioning it causes stress disorders among command staff.

But what about the Chinese military? Their traditions go back millennia, and they are absolutely gargantuan.

To a degree this is true, but only a small degree. The Chinese military was completely reformulated in China's Revolution, but more importantly many of China's military institutions are entirely new. They have no "backwards compatibility" to maintain when developing procedures for their navy, air force, missile forces, drone forces, etc. This leaves them flexible and highly adaptable to technological changes, and military tech changes are coming rapid-fire these days. For example, even if one believes that the US still has the edge in AI (highly debatable, but whatever...), China is better positioned to integrate the latest-and-greatest into their military doctrine than is the US. Needless to say, China also has the industrial might to rapidly build out bleeding edge drone forces and robot weapons platforms, if they choose.

Even the Chinese special forces are upgrading at breakneck speed, and not just metaphorically. One can laugh at the videos online of Chinese troops on odd electric wheeled things zipping around, but note those helmet mounted augmented reality displays integrating data from an accompanying drone swam that is giving them superhuman situational awareness. All fun and games until you are the one on the battlefield facing them and they know better where you are hiding than you do yourself.

When (and it really is "when" and not "if") the US begins the kinetic phase of its war against China, it will be like diving into a wood chipper. The Empire will be stunned by how incredibly outclassed they are. So many in the West are still wearing blinders and only seeing China from more than half a century ago (JD Vance and his "Chinese peasants", anyone? And Vance is more current in his worldview than most in the West).

Posted by: William Gruff | May 18 2025 14:15 utc | 4

The F-35 mistake-jet is only a jobs program, with subcontractors in important congressional districts to spread the happiness. The expensive faulty jet carries the largest & hottest engine ever put into a fighter jet that claims stealth. . hah

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 14:16 utc | 5

Good collection b thanks.

Especially liked
https://azovlobby.substack.com/p/how-we-learned-to-stop-worrying-and

Which skewers the propagandist contortions of the Western ‘liberal’ media.
As they transcended from seeing to completely ignoring nazios with their blind eye.

This process of nazification. Through nationalism and Fear and mistrust is accelerating in the U.K. daily more.

When gatekeepers and sheepdogs are let loose with their PR ubermensch ZioFascist supremos dumb scripts; the collared attack dogs, the supposed ‘free thinking journalists’ , entertainers and the always complicit hot-bed academia - the last being the worst of the lot, as they poison the young natural intellectual minds with a slurry of bullshit left/rightism.

They end up praising the road to fascism - as inevitable - while pretending to rubbish it. Keeping the ‘liberal’ ‘leftists’ in a tight herd as they are moved by the ‘Overton window’ moving to full Nazism and global financial controllers- away from anti fascist/anti Nazi pro socialist public spending.

The posts doing the rounds on social media are now questioning the concept of the long established state pension - because the pension fund that people have been told forever their national insurance contributions does NOT EXIST!

Duh..: it never did!
As all who know that the first NI supposedly paid for the first Pensioners! How else? There was no NI before. That’s how it was ‘sold’ to the masses- not as Money that was easily printed by the Treasury as all central spending is!

That’s one new narrative trying to wind up Brits who are not natural target for frothing racism, especially if they are the targets of racists! That is the ‘flood’ of illegal migrants! Narrative. Being allowed to ‘live in high profile expensive hotel rooms on ‘our taxes’, in cities and towns, where they are highly visible by the huge numbers - many hundreds.
It’s an obvious red rag.

Another is the degradation of parliamentry independent minded MP’s and the move towards a ‘strongman’ Churchillian figure - as starmzy flounders the comical FARTAGE is chosen ahead of the Black British Tory Party Woman Leaderine.

Just what the country needs more pantomime actors playing at dictators, like shelensky and others all over, leading Europe to war against the ancient enemies the French and German and Spanish …urmmm Ok not against them, WITH them against Russia and EurAsia and Africa - the Big One! Can’t pretend we’re on the sides of the antinazis (or anti ziofascistnazis anymore.

So it goes.

It is divide and rule.
It’s Nazism
If It looks like the Goebbles and Ponsonby’s propoganda edicts to explain how to make people go to war - it’s a propaganda duck.

Sherr kyirstarmztrooper was put in to No 10, go to war against Russia and China as the unipolar ziofascist world order is defeated by the rising polycentric world led by Russia and China.

Like all such western uniparty stooges he is diminutive! It makes them look better on TeeVee! Tv and press photographers are TOLD not to identify their stature! The lifted shoes etc.
All PR wank by the spaffers of Eton and oxbridge…

The Refusal to understand that and knee jerk endless blaming Russia and China by the controlled media , academia and political bullshitters - having their strings pulled by the Old Slave Owners and Money Controllers of the collective west is what has got us here.

The answers simple.
Understand that WE are the actual BAD guys.
We are the Nazis and we are allowing ourselves to be led by toads to the insanity of defending our Nazis against the ACTUAL anti-Nazis.

It is ‘US’ that is enabling the daily slaughter and attempted extermination of the Semetic natives of The Levant for the benefit of the ziofascist owners.

That we can’t or refuse to see these simple truths and concentrate on the attention grabbing ‘trees’ means we are forced to not see the ‘Wood’ - That makes one either a devious charlatan or a dumb foolish knave for accepting the Narratives deployed daily through the media.

All Media.
———-
‘The psychological factor in war is just as important as the military factor. The morale of civilians, as well as of soldiers, must be kept up to the mark. The War Offices, Admiralties, and Air Ministries look after the military side. Departments have to be created to see to the psychological side. People must never be allowed to become despondent; so victories must be exaggerated and defeats, if not concealed, at any rate minimized, and the stimulus of indignation, horror, and hatred must be assiduously and continuously pumped into the public mind by means of "propaganda."[11]

...a Government which has decided on embarking on the hazardous and terrible enterprise of war must at the outset present a one-sided case in justification of its action, and cannot afford to admit in any particular whatever the smallest degree of right or reason on the part of the people it has made up its mind to fight. Facts must be distorted, relevant circumstances concealed and a picture presented which by its crude colouring will persuade the ignorant people that their Government is blameless, their cause is righteous, and that the indisputable wickedness of the enemy has been proved beyond question. A moment's reflection would tell any reasonable person that such obvious bias cannot possibly represent the truth. But the moment's reflection is not allowed; lies are circulated with great rapidity. The unthinking mass accept them and by their excitement sway the rest. The amount of rubbish and humbug that pass under the name of patriotism in war-time in all countries is sufficient to make decent people blush when they are subsequently disillusioned.’

From wiki page of Ponsonby explaining how it’s done.

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 18 2025 14:20 utc | 6

@ William Gruff | May 18 2025 14:15 utc | 4
re: . . .the US begins the kinetic phase of its war against China

There may be some shooting US vs. China, maybe not. How will China deal with the renegade Taiwan government, perhaps without a shot being fired? . Take note of the no-shooting situation in the South China Sea which is not affected by the Philippines mutual treaty with the US. – “Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety. . .” So go gray, with no "armed attack." China is smart, and patient too. So go blockade, electronic attack, etc.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 14:30 utc | 7

thanks b and to the informed moa posters.. much appreciated..

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 14:35 utc | 8

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 14:30 utc | 7

########

China wants to reintegrate Taiwan culturally, like making peace with an estranged sibling.

I expect the process to look more like how it went in Hong Kong than how it has gone in Ukraine.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 14:38 utc | 9

@ LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 14:38 utc | 9
re: China wants to reintegrate Taiwan culturally

Yes. China has the "Cross-strait Relations" effort here in addition to other friendly efforts.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 14:47 utc | 10

Re: Rules Based Order:

War and International Politics - John J. Mearsheimer / MIT

Hmm...
I don't know who did write that long-winded dog's breakfast of circuitous baloney. But it didn't read like any previous article I've read by John Mearsheimer.

It's full of repeated phrases, irrelevantly rephrased concepts, and hasn't been proof read or corrected. I'm surprised that JM would publish such rambling and inconclusive drivel under his own name.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | May 18 2025 14:56 utc | 11

I remember being quite depressed when Switzerland committed to $6Billion in F-35 purchases, thinking at the time they should have bought French or Swedish, now it
appears it should have been Chinese!

Posted by: SwissArmyMan | May 18 2025 13:27 utc | 2

---

Anything but Swiss is a tribute.

It is not as if $6Billions invested here at home would produce inferior results to buying foreign wares.

The endemic grift in Switzerland is practically impossible to overcome.

Posted by: too scents | May 18 2025 15:01 utc | 12

from Taipei Times . . .here
"Book fair displays Taiwan flag despite China protest" -- Yes, because Taipei still flies the Republic of China flag, despite the 1971 UNGA resolution which states: "Recognizing that the representatives of the Government of the People's Republic of China are the only lawful representatives of China to the United Nations and that the People's Republic of China is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, Decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek [i.e. ROC] from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it.". .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 15:05 utc | 13

« Moon of Alabama, where barflies insult each other and engage in bitch storms »

Like b used to write, in the box where we write our comments :

« Please be sure to insult and attack each other ! »

But he removed that, cause we’re so good at abiding by his prescription.

Posted by: Featherless | May 18 2025 15:23 utc | 14

i think taiwan is going to go the same way as honk kong.. maybe i am wrong, but by the time they get round to this, that will be how it goes..

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 15:24 utc | 15

@ Featherless | May 18 2025 15:23 utc | 14

hey - it's just a bunch of americans talking F 35 trash.. get with the program, lol..

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 15:25 utc | 16

the Seeking Alpha link demands that i sign up to read the article.. not doing that.. oh well..

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 15:27 utc | 17

How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Nazis (Part 1) - Azov Lobby Blog

good overview.. thanks for the link...

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 15:31 utc | 18

Don Bacon @7: "How will China deal with the renegade Taiwan government, perhaps without a shot being fired?... China is smart, and patient too. So go blockade, electronic attack, etc."

Absolutely. China does not want to see Taiwan turned into another Ukraine. They have options that Russia didn't have.

But the coming war with the Empire is not up to China. As the Empire sees its sanctions and tariffs and proxy fights fail to bend the arc of history back to America, it will become increasingly belligerent until it goes kinetic. From the perspective of a zero-sum worldview, what other choice is there?

Posted by: William Gruff | May 18 2025 15:38 utc | 19

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 15:27 utc | 17

#######

https://archive.ph/ephXu

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 15:39 utc | 20

I see now the very end of the article is truncated.

My mistake.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 15:41 utc | 21

from TehranTimes, Iran

During this annual gathering, Ayatollah Khamenei referred to the recent remarks made by the U.S. President during his visit to the region, saying, “Some of the remarks made during the U.S. President’s trip to the region aren’t even worth a response at all. The level of those remarks is so low that they are a source of shame for both the speaker and the American nation.”
Ayatollah Khamenei described the U.S. President’s claim that he wants to use power for peace as a lie, and added: “When have they ever used their power to bring peace? He, other U.S. officials, and U.S. administrations have used their power for the massacre in Gaza, for igniting wars wherever they could, and for supporting their own mercenaries." He stressed that power can be used for peace and security, stating, “This is precisely why the Islamic Republic — despite the enemies’ wishes — will continue to increase its power and the power of the country every single day. But that’s not what they did. They used their power to provide the Zionist regime with ten-ton bombs to be dropped on Gaza’s children, hospitals, people’s homes, in Lebanon, and wherever else they could.” . . . here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 15:48 utc | 22

@ William Gruff | May 18 2025 15:38 utc | 19 with the good description of our future except for the details about the kinetic part.....thx

I hope the kinetic part is the death of global private finance and all its worthless tit suckers.

I like the concept of humans measured by merit and not inheritance and exceptionalism. I support building a world that deprecates barbarism, patriarchy and inequality of countries.

Has society seen enough colonialist ugly now to insure that social organization energy does not manifest itself in our future forms of collectivism?
Evidently the RoW is not revulsed enough yet to make it stop.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 15:54 utc | 23

@ William Gruff | May 18 2025 15:38 utc | 19
re: But the coming war with the Empire is not up to China.

Are the Hawaii combat commanders up to doing another 'Gulf of Tonkin' situation? Maybe.

USNI - The Truth About Tonkin
Questions about the Gulf of Tonkin incidents have persisted for more than 40 years. But once-classified documents and tapes released in the past several years, combined with previously uncovered facts, make clear that high government officials distorted facts and deceived the American public about events that led to full U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 15:59 utc | 24

psychohistorian @23: "I hope the kinetic part is the death of global private finance and all its worthless tit suckers."

Unless humanity stumbles and descends into "Dark Ages MkII", that is where things are headed. Unfortunately, a few steps remain between here and there, though.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 18 2025 16:01 utc | 25

Re: Seeking Alpha financial site

Is HQ’d in a small town that was ethnically cleansed in 1947/48.

Best not to visit nor sign up. Very likely all your data goes to Mossad etc.

Posted by: Exile | May 18 2025 16:14 utc | 26

@james

No, I’m referring to the trend of otherwise decent barflies being shitty to other barflies, despite b’s clear instructions NOT to engage in shitty behaviour.

Ya, I’m obviously oversensitive. But I’m on the same side as b regarding this, UNLIKE these shitty, disrespectful barflies, who disrespect other barflies AND b.

Posted by: Featherless | May 18 2025 16:17 utc | 27

I like the concept of humans measured by merit and not inheritance and exceptionalism. I support building a world that deprecates barbarism, patriarchy and inequality of countries.

Has society seen enough colonialist ugly now to insure that social organization energy does not manifest itself in our future forms of collectivism?
Evidently the RoW is not revulsed enough yet to make it stop.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 15:54 utc | 23

I typically agree with you, but what does "patriarchy" have to do with it? Were you an Eric Fromm fan in the 70s? Opposition to "patriarchy" is a hall mark of the Imperialist Dems and their identity politics.

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 16:41 utc | 28

To view keyboard shortcuts, press question mark
View keyboard shortcuts
Grok 3
See new posts
Are there any in depth news stories about Yemen targeting and nearly hitting an American F-35 stealth fighter jet
Several news stories have reported on an incident during the U.S. military’s Operation Rough Rider (March-May 2025) in Yemen, where Houthi forces nearly hit an American F-35 stealth fighter jet with a surface-to-air missile (SAM). Below is a detailed summary of the available information from credible sources, focusing on in-depth coverage of the event:
Key Details of the Incident
Operation Rough Rider: The U.S. launched an intensified bombing campaign against Houthi targets in Yemen starting March 15, 2025, under the Trump administration. The campaign aimed to curb Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping and their drone and missile strikes, including those targeting Israel.
F-35 Incident: During this operation, a U.S. F-35 Lightning II, a fifth-generation stealth fighter, was forced to take evasive maneuvers to avoid a Houthi SAM. The missile came close enough to require the jet to maneuver aggressively, though it escaped unharmed.
Houthi Air Defenses: The Houthis, backed by Iran, possess a mix of Soviet-era and Iranian-supplied anti-air systems, including mobile SAMs and infrared-homing missiles like the Saqr/358 series. These systems, while not as advanced as Russia’s S-400, proved capable of threatening advanced U.S. aircraft, including the F-35.
Other Aircraft at Risk: Alongside the F-35, several U.S. F-16s were also nearly struck by Houthi air defenses during the campaign. Additionally, the Houthis shot down at least seven U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drones, each costing around $30 million.
Ceasefire Context: On May 6, 2025, President Trump announced a ceasefire mediated by Oman, halting U.S. strikes after the Houthis agreed to stop targeting Red Sea vessels. Some reports suggest the near-loss of advanced jets like the F-35 and F-16, combined with the high cost of the campaign (over $1 billion), influenced the decision to pause operations.
In-Depth News Stories and Analysis
The War Zone (TWZ) – “How The Houthis' Rickety Air Defenses Threaten Even The F-35” (May 14, 2025)
Details: TWZ provided a detailed analysis of the Houthi air defense capabilities, noting their use of highly mobile SAM systems and infrared-homing missiles. A U.S. official confirmed to TWZ that the F-35 had to maneuver to evade Houthi SAMs, stating, “They got close enough.” The article highlights how Houthi defenses prompted increased use of stealth aircraft like the F-35 and costly standoff munitions to minimize risks.
Significance: The piece emphasizes the surprising effectiveness of Houthi air defenses against advanced U.S. aircraft, raising questions about the F-35’s survivability in asymmetric warfare. It also references a prior TWZ deep dive into the Houthi air defense arsenal, underscoring their Iranian-backed capabilities.

Link: TWZ Article
The New York Times – “Why Trump Suddenly Declared Victory Over the Houthi Militia” (May 12, 2025)
Details: The NYT reported that within the first 30 days of Operation Rough Rider, Houthi air defenses nearly struck an F-35 and several F-16s, raising concerns about potential American casualties. The article frames the incident as part of a broader, costly, and inconclusive U.S. campaign that failed to establish air superiority over the Houthis.
Significance: The NYT connects the near-miss to the Trump administration’s decision to declare a ceasefire, suggesting that the risks to advanced aircraft and the campaign’s high costs (including the loss of seven MQ-9 drones) prompted a strategic retreat.
Link: NYT Article
19FortyFive – “The Houthis Proved the F-35 Fighter Can Be Shot Down” (May 16, 2025)
Details: This article describes the F-35 incident as a wake-up call, noting that the jet’s advanced stealth features did not prevent it from being targeted by Houthi defenses. It highlights the Houthis’ Iranian-supplied weaponry and training, which enabled them to challenge U.S. air power.
Significance: The piece questions the F-35’s invulnerability, arguing that even non-peer adversaries like the Houthis can pose significant threats. It also critiques the broader efficacy of the U.S. campaign in Yemen, noting the Houthis’ resilience.
Link: 19FortyFive Article
Business Insider – “The F-35 stealth fighter isn't invisible” (May 17, 2025)
Details: This article discusses the F-35’s near-miss, quoting retired U.S. Army Major General Gordon Davis, who described Houthi air defenses as “a significant threat” to aircraft operating near Yemen. It notes uncertainty about whether the F-35 was directly targeted or if the Houthis fired in its general direction, forcing evasive action.
Significance: The piece underscores that the F-35, despite its advanced stealth capabilities, is not invulnerable. It compares the Houthi defenses to more sophisticated threats the jet was designed to counter, suggesting the incident may not fundamentally alter perceptions of the F-35’s capabilities.
Link: Business Insider Article
BulgarianMilitary.com – “Not Russia, not China, Houthis nearly down F-35 over Yemen” (May 14, 2025)
Details: This outlet describes the F-35 incident as a “shocking near-miss” during Operation Rough Rider, emphasizing the technological and strategic implications. It notes that the F-35’s survival reflects its design strengths, but the fact it was targeted challenges assumptions about stealth superiority.
Significance: The article frames the incident as evidence of the evolving nature of asymmetric warfare, where even less-resourced groups like the Houthis can threaten cutting-edge U.S. technology.
Link: BulgarianMilitary Article
Additional Context and Sentiment
Houthi Capabilities: The Houthis’ ability to target the F-35 likely stems from their Iranian-supplied systems, such as the Saqr/358 missile, which uses infrared homing and has some loitering capability. While not as advanced as top-tier air defenses, these systems exploit the F-35’s infrared signature, which cannot be fully masked.
Public and Social Media Reaction: Posts on X reflect shock and concern about the incident, with some users claiming it “humiliated” U.S. air power and exposed vulnerabilities in the F-35’s stealth capabilities. Others argue it highlights the effectiveness of Chinese or Iranian-supplied weapons used by the Houthis. However, these claims are speculative and not fully substantiated by primary sources.

Strategic Implications: The incident has sparked debate about the F-35’s survivability against less sophisticated adversaries and the broader challenges of maintaining air superiority in contested environments. Some analysts suggest it may lead to tactical shifts, such as greater reliance on standoff weapons or stealth bombers like the B-2.
Limitations and Uncertainties
Specific Details: The exact type of missile used by the Houthis and the circumstances of the F-35’s targeting (e.g., whether it was a direct lock or a proximity engagement) remain unclear.
Houthi Claims: Houthi-aligned sources have claimed responsibility for forcing U.S. aircraft into evasive maneuvers, but their statements lack independent verification and may exaggerate their capabilities.
Official U.S. Statements: U.S. officials have confirmed the incident but provided limited details, likely to avoid revealing operational vulnerabilities.
Conclusion
The near-miss of an F-35 by Houthi forces in Yemen during Operation Rough Rider is a significant event that underscores the evolving threat posed by Iranian-backed groups and the limitations of even the most advanced stealth technology. In-depth news stories from The War Zone, The New York Times, 19FortyFive, Business Insider, and BulgarianMilitary.com provide detailed accounts and analysis, highlighting both the tactical details and broader strategic implications. For further reading, the linked articles offer comprehensive insights into the incident and its context within the U.S.-Houthi conflict.
If you’d like me to dive deeper into a specific aspect (e.g., Houthi air defense systems, the F-35’s stealth features, or the political fallout), let me know!
27 posts
15 web pages

Posted by: Hot Carl | May 18 2025 16:42 utc | 29

Here's a comment I wrote at my substack on the issue of war between the Outlaw US Empire and China/Russia:

"The main issue of launching a big war is the lack of men and material to do so. All the Outlaw US Empire really has is its submarine fleet and their missiles as their ICBMs, cruise missiles and bombers with gravity bombs are all interceptible, and in the ICMB cases, many unlaunchable due to age. Both Russia and China have greater military capabilities. That’s why Trump went the Economic War route that he’s fucked-up so badly."

Unmentioned is the return fire damage that the Empire will suffer. And then one must ask: What the hell is the strategic goal in attacking China? What is supposed to be accomplished? How does such a war advance US interests? Those three questions merit deep thinking because attacking China/Russia is beyond senseless, IMO.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 18 2025 16:42 utc | 30

@ Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 16:41 utc | 28 who asks what patriarchy has to do with it.

I can't believe you asked the question but perhaps less humans would die if women had agency in our form of social organization, eh?

Is barbarism a female dominant trait? Might-Makes-Right?

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 16:46 utc | 31

@ Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 16:41 utc | 28 who asks what patriarchy has to do with it.

I can't believe you asked the question but perhaps less humans would die if women had agency in our form of social organization, eh?

Is barbarism a female dominant trait? Might-Makes-Right?

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 16:46 utc | 31

Hillary, Kaja, Ursula? I could go on, but with respect I think you drank the Imperial Kool aid on this issue. It's not a gender thing, it's a class thing, a Capitalist thing. You can feed all the blacks, women and gays you like into the Imperialist elite and you will invariably get pro war, pro billionaire, pro genocide monsters.

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 16:52 utc | 32

I read the Mersheimer article. Again, he's more sane than the dominant American foreign policy gurus, but it's still not sufficiently attuned to reality.

He subordinates economic theory to a theory of "survival" to support his realist argument. So, the critical concept of Imperialism is removed from the equation at the outset. Consequently, there is no differentiation between Imperialist and non Imperialist powers (Russia/China). So were left with all three powers merely guided by their respective security concerns. This essay is so abstract as to be meaningless. It was likely written this way to win over a particular audience: the Imperialist political elite. This isn't scientific, it's just part of a subjective, internal strategy debate within the US ruling class.

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 17:01 utc | 33

@ Ahenobarbus | May 18 2025 16:41 utc | 28 who asks what patriarchy has to do with it.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 16:46 utc | 31

Actually, although it is counter intuitive, Ahenobarbus is correct. Watch this 4 minute video, below, by Jordan Peterson and I think you will agree with Ahenobarbus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6B9NNe0kJo

Posted by: canuck | May 18 2025 17:03 utc | 34

America, it will become increasingly belligerent until it goes kinetic. From the perspective of a zero-sum worldview, what other choice is there?

&

Unless humanity stumbles and descends into "Dark Ages MkII", that is where things are headed.

William Gruff || 19/25

The talk about a bifurcation in various paradigms between 'east and west' that went about here recently struck me. It was just such a thing which brought about the MkI Dark Ages after all as well. However the world is more interconnected now ... Btw, I have a pet theory that the Silk Road drying up played a large part for MkI too. This was not caused on either of the terminal ends, but rather along the way by Mongol and Turkic invaders finally getting the upper hand over the Persian civilization, as embodied by the end of ancient waterbuilding in the region.

Anyhow, even if you stick to zero-sum thinking, it must be clear that the Chinese economic model is more efficient, and that the means for global domination by force are at this time not available to the US and friends (at least I can't see them). Hence it seems the sound decision to refrain from the domination agenda of yore, and focus on internal rejuvenation, aiming to play an adequate role in the future. The alternative might well indeed by the Dark Ages MkII for the 'west'.

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 17:10 utc | 35

@ Featherless | May 18 2025 16:17 utc | 27
re: barflies being shitty to other barflies

Yes, it's wrong.
How boring would life be if we all had the same opinions, and not only at horse races.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 17:23 utc | 36

Hot Carl provided something for the more technology minded about Houthi vs. F-35. From one of his TWZ links I got another piece there, which is a deep dive into A2/AD capabilities written by Joseph Trevithick whom I consider a spin doctor, but not one to make up technological data (please correct me if I'm wrong on that). Here's a relevant excerpt, but make sure to check out the full thing:

"It is also worth noting here that the Houthis routinely boast that the vast bulk of their overall missile arsenal, along with their drones, is domestically developed and produced. Iran’s involvement is indisputable, but Yemeni militants are capable, at least to a degree, of developing, producing, and/or assembling missiles and other weapon systems within the country.

“We’ve been surprised at times with some of the things that we see them do, and it makes us scratch our head a little bit,” a senior U.S. defense official told TWZ and other outlets earlier this year about the Houthis, adding that the group is “not super technologically advanced, but we do think they’re pretty innovative.”

“There’s a good bit right now we don’t know about the Houthis.”

https://www.twz.com/news-features/what-air-defenses-do-the-houthis-in-yemen-actually-have

It has a lot of pictures, too. Did you know that there are beautiful parades in Yemen?

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 17:40 utc | 37

How boring would life be if we all had the same opinions, and not only at horse races.

Don Bacon | May 18 2025 17:23 utc | 36

Not just boring, but a stark warning sign that we are living in a society incapable of proper political conduct, most likely to be outright fascistic/totalitarian.

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 17:44 utc | 38

Apologies for missing my /blockquote> repeatedly.

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 17:46 utc | 39

Did you know that there are beautiful parades in Yemen?

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 17:40 utc | 37

#########

Every Friday (Jumma), 2 million people take to the streets in Sanaa to listen to speeches.

This doesn't happen anywhere in the West.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 17:54 utc | 40

@ LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 15:39 utc | 20

thanks kindly!!

@ Featherless | May 18 2025 16:17 utc | 27

i stand with you on that!! although a little ruffling of feathers is okay, some of the dynamics are really counter productive and not something i support either...

----------------------

book by wolfgang streeck, 2024 - taking back control? states and state systems after globalism is the title...

here is a quote for you from page 187 for consideration..

"The historical dynamic of the state systems of today must be understood in the context of the pressure towards denationalization and globalization exerted by contemporary capitalism in the crisis of stagnation and of the reciprocal relationship between capitalist accumulation and state institutions, both national and international. Here, the essence of the matter is the vertical dimension of states and state systems, in particular, their degree of universalism and centralization in response to a denationalized capitalism's demand for convergence. The struggle over the relation between market, economy, and capitalism, on the one hand, and society, on the other, is at the same time a struggle over the structure of the structure of the state system and vice versa; capitalist globalization comes up against the proper dynamic of the relation between state structures and their underlying societies. Whoever wants neo-liberalism must want globalization and Europeanization; whoever wants globalization and Europeanization wants neo-liberalism, whether they know this or not; whoever wants the market to be embedded in democratic politics must oppose the globalization of the state system and, with it, global governance. This conflict does not take place on a tabula rasa but in a historically grown state system in which the march into global convergence of the ways of economic activity has come to a standstill in the cul-de-sac of conflict-ridden and crisis-prone empires."

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 18:03 utc | 41

over the structure (of the structure) of the state system - my typo is included in the brackets.. it is not their in the book..

Posted by: james | May 18 2025 18:06 utc | 42

Romanian Presidential Election is about to be stolen.

Posted by: Kaiama | May 18 2025 18:43 utc | 43

I'm bringing this over from the Ukraine OT because it is of wider interest:

supporting islamist terrorists in Sahel. https://sundayindependent.co.za/analysis/2025-04-16-ukraines-double-game-smiles-in-diplomacy-bloodshed-in-africa/ Article in a southafrican newspaper explains facts about destabilizing ukrainian military support to jihadists in Mali. Giving them drones, starlink satellite devices and heavy mortars and ammo. Three Sahel countries i northern Afrika have severed ukrainian embassies in their countries. Talk about double standards…

Posted by: Truemoon | May 18 2025 18:16 utc | 39

Thanks for posting it.

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 18:51 utc | 44

DunGroanin | May 18 2025 14:20 utc | 6 ....

Till those "left" of centre stop their fervent (why?) endorsement of population replacement -- which is very obviously being inflicted by those who rule -- in terms of general public support the "left" will really get nowhere. Because no matter how much of the rest of the "left" agenda the public do agree with, no matter what colour they happen to be they are not going to vote for their own deliberate replacenment.
George Galloway does recognise that -- so how come the rest of the socialists and semi-socialists re so obsessively -- even fanatically -- blinkered?
A situation which leaves the way conveniently clear for false-flag pressure relief via zionist judas-goats like Robinson.
Nobody who isn't a total moron would believe for one moment that the Starmer gang suddenly want or intend to stop mass-immigration, any more than the (disturbingly similar) asset-stripping Thatcherite liars and their other successors did. It is a long-running Political Establishment policy no matter which franchise flag of party convenience has been or is in office. It just plain ignores the fact that the country is increasingly unsustainable.
Did Marx, Lenin or Trotsky ever demand such a thing as mass-immigration just for its own sake?
If not, then where, by who and when was such an ideological peculiarity cobbled up?
Whatever the answer, the continuous and media-facilitated charade plays very well indeed into the agendas of transnational capitalism/globalism.

Posted by: Cynic | May 18 2025 19:21 utc | 45

There are many conspiracy theories I am inclined to believe in. However, the limiting factor in most of them is the level of incompetence in general Western society. I must wonder if it's getting worse.

Thus, we read weekly about ships crashing into bridges or aircraft colliding or a President in charge of nuclear weapons who slurred, couldn't remember when his son died, etc. As to very large ships and their potential mishaps, I recall going to the USS Intrepid and noting that they had a custom carpenter's level in the captain's view. It's kinda important that the whole carrier doesn't fall over, I guess. Check that bubble.

I was watching LIVE satellite video in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing. I saw the police shooting at an Evil Terrorist hiding in a boat (Pop, pop, pop !). Turns out, he was unarmed. Then, there were Live questions about some odd shadowy group near the finish line with an insignia. Response? "Next question !!".

It's a human world. Our grasp of reality is modulated by ignorance or disinterest by the public. Thank God for a few OCD folks who won't Let Go. Currently, the world flirts with nuclear oblivion because folks such as the British hate, hate, hate Russia even while their nation rots. Ah, well. Estonia's similar. How's those demographics doing? Like Ukraine, Hate triumphs over survival.

Posted by: Eighthman | May 18 2025 20:08 utc | 46

Thanks to b and posters for a nice mix of comments as this week has ended and begins anew! To psychohistorian on his patriarchical thoughts -- today is the feast of the Samaritan woman in my Orthodox Easter Sundays, with the entire of John's fourth chapter worth digesting in counterpoint.

Pay attention. "Neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem..." On the way to Galilee from Judea we find ourselves in Samaria at a well near a field given by Jacob to his son Joseph. No disciples; they've gone off to town to get food.

For some reason, revisiting Istanbul had me shifting from Dostoievski's "The Devils" to his "The Idiot". A lot of dark derangement was there, but it could just be the wind bashing my beautiful roses about ... May just doesn't seem to want to settle. (Ihey have been lovely nonetheless, on one dropdead gorgeous day.)

A prophet is without honor in his own country. Yet Istanbul was Constantinople once.) It's hard to see past shifting nonsensical subterfuge, but 'lift up your eyes, and see how the fields are white for harvest.' Miracles follow.

It's all in the seeing.

Posted by: juliania | May 18 2025 20:47 utc | 47

Cynic | May 18 2025 19:21 utc | 45

Did Marx, Lenin or Trotsky ever demand such a thing as mass-immigration just for its own sake?

In short, no. Here's a seminal article restating the traditional left position:

The Left Case Against Open Borders

As to where this fetishization of migration for its own sake came from, the answer is more complex. I think it's largely the result of the degeneration of left organizations and their capture by liberals who believe that the best of all possible worlds is one where people from developing countries can escape their unfortunate situation and win the right to deliver liberals their UberEats in return for poverty wages and bunch of performative pandering.

Posted by: S.P. Korolev | May 18 2025 21:27 utc | 48

Posted by: Kaiama | May 18 2025 18:43 utc | 43

#######

Elections aren't real. Sometimes, I wonder if they ever were.

Power is too precious and sought after to leave it to random proles.

Even Iran and China carefully pre-select their leaders. They don't leave it up to a captured media to do the vetting.

From my observation, the CPC and Islamic Council do a decent job. One cannot imagine a Biden-type candidate being on the ballot. That's only possible when people want a Presidency they can control and act freely behind.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 21:44 utc | 49

OK, so I’ve just watched/listened to Andrei Martyanov’s latest video (yeah, I know that will disqualify my post in some folks eyes) and it got me wondering: do we have any graduates/PHD’s in “political science” lurking or contributing?

Because I’m wondering what, exactly, “political science” is? Does it have well-established and well-known experimental frameworks? Is there a system of peer review for new concepts, theories or discoveries? Where is the historical archive of research (and sometimes blunder) that exists for something like chemical, biological or physical sciences?

Is it even a real science? Or is it a meal-ticket for pumping out low-grade essays and articles for publication in Mighty Western Wurlitzer organs?

What is “political science”?

Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | May 18 2025 21:44 utc | 50

How "Made in China" actually works. Take this video and apply that model to 90% of Western brands.

https://x.com/OopsGuess/status/1923877617138340031

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 21:48 utc | 51

Thanks 'b' for linking this piece - I read it a few days ago and highly recommend it - aside from Ulrike Guérot - there are many other examples

Enemy of the state: the political persecution of Ulrike Guérot

For years, Guérot was one of Germany’s most respected political scientists. But after she criticised the pandemic response and the proxy war in Ukraine, she found herself cast as a public enemy

Thomas Fazi, May 12, 2025

https://www.thomasfazi.com/p/enemy-of-the-state-the-political

Posted by: Don Firineach | May 18 2025 21:51 utc | 52

Actually, I can probably partly answer my own post; political science degrees, like economics degrees and MBAs, are designed for those who are not creative enough for Arts, not literary enough for Classics, and not studious enough for real STEMs.

In short, if anyone has a degree in political science, then they have a degree in mediocrity, just like economics or MBAs.

Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | May 18 2025 21:53 utc | 53

All profit is arbitrage.

Jobs weren't stolen from the West. The 1% sold out the workers to capture larger margins.

Zoom out far enough, slavery and colonialism are fundamental to "modern" Capitalism.

There is no greater arbitrage than labor exploitation, even in a digital economy. It's not just direct wages but benefits like healthcare and retirements too.

China is solving this by forcing reinvestment socially. Better housing, good, education, and healthcare.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 22:00 utc | 54

Alastair Crooke:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrJlfwksyXQ

- Stephen Witkoff seems to have taken a very hardline point of view in the talks / negociations with Iran in Oman. Witkoff has taken the standpoint that Iran must get rid of all things nuclear and not be able to enrich uranium. But this is also the view of the socalled "Deep state" in the US. That "Deep state" in the US goes back to Reinhard Gehlen who was head of intelligence in Nazi Germany.
- Israel is right now liability for the "US security interests" in the Middle East (think: israeli actions in Gaza & the West Bank) but also in regard with "the struggle" with China, Iran and Russia.
- Israel is useful for the US interests in the Middle East but what the israelis do Gaza is hindering the US of achieving its goals in the Middle |East.
- The world is NOT moving towards a "multi polar world" but towards a "Bi polar world". I.e. the US (+ "allies") vs. Russia, Iran and China. (I personally don't agree. I think the world is moving towards a set of say 4, 5, 6 or 7 "regional powers" of which the US is one.)
- Israel, in the current situation, is a threat to the Middle East and Trump's policies towards the Middle East and could tear up the entire Middle East. This is even for Saudia Arabia unacceptable.

Posted by: WMG | May 18 2025 22:15 utc | 55

Air superiority is everything.

🛩🇨🇳 A video showing the concept of using the new high-altitude Chinese reconnaissance and attack drone "Jiutian".

China has not previously reported what will be placed in the internal compartment of the drone. But the teaser gives reason to believe that it could very well accommodate a swarm of drones in the future.

It is reported that as soon as the PLA aviation gains air superiority, the UAV will bring down a swarm of kamikaze drones from a height of 15,000 m to destroy enemy ground and sea targets.

2 minutes video
https://x.com/dana916/status/1924213484046155820

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 22:17 utc | 56

With the recent showing of Chinese Fighters and Air-to-Air missiles in Pakistan, China will be a "tough out" when it comes to contested airspaces.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 22:18 utc | 57

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 18 2025 22:17 utc | 56

A few dozen shipments of those would make a nice present from Xi to Putin.

It would solve some potential issues in the Baltic sea.

Posted by: Ghost of Zanon | May 18 2025 22:36 utc | 58

the concept of using the new high-altitude Chinese reconnaissance and attack drone "Jiutian".

That's a massed attack from range, using heavy drone motherships, which release a swarm for terminal homing or reconaissance. The defender will be in an awkward position against this, since he has to deal with all (or nearly all) incoming missiles to get away without harm. Industrial production capability strongly favours the attacker. Jiutian is said to be around ten tonnes with near Mach speed and 2,000km range.

I predict the working countermeasures will be an automated laser gun. I've wanted one to protect my campfire against mosquito swarms ever since I travelled Finland in the summer, lol.

Loitering counter-air might be a thing, too.

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 22:55 utc | 59

An interesting refutation to Hegel, introduced by Chris Hedges:

The 19th century socialist Louis-Auguste Blanqui, unlike nearly all of his contemporaries, dismissed the belief central to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Karl Marx, that human history is a linear progression toward equality and greater morality. He warned that this absurd positivism is perpetrated by oppressors to disempower the oppressed...

“For humanity” Blanqui wrote, “is never stationary. It either advances or goes back. Its progressive march leads it to equality. Its regressive march goes back through every stage of privilege to human slavery, the final word of the right to property.” Further, he wrote, “I am not amongst those who claim that progress can be taken for granted, that humanity cannot go backwards.”

https://consortiumnews.com/2025/05/18/chris-hedges-the-new-dark-age/

Blanqui makes an excellent point. People who consider themselves "progressive" seem risibly naïve to me -- as moral progress is not a thing. Historically, we go forward and backward, in whether we treat each other, and the home planet, with a decent modicum of respect.

Posted by: Aleph_Null | May 18 2025 23:00 utc | 60

“For humanity” Blanqui wrote, “is never stationary. It either advances or goes back."

I think it's worse than that; or actually, different. There is no measure of goodness which readily translates into all states of moral 'progression'. All that we have is relative, with the single exception that, just like we are, others are present -- --

Posted by: persiflo | May 18 2025 23:22 utc | 61

@Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | May 18 2025 21:53 utc | 53

Now, Now Jeremy! Tut, Tut.

Your STEM credentials are showing - please tuck them in - there are ladies in the bar who might be scandalised by such exposure.

That said, I once suggested to the Dean of a local Business School that she should transfer her Economics Department over to the English Department in another Faculty - the Literary Fiction section,of course. She smiled ...

I also expressed my sympathy to the MacroEconomic heads on a local blog on the difficulty they had 'doing macro' without a variable termed 'Political Power' - and got no response whatsoever- not even a digital smile!

Once upon a time there used to be something called 'Scholarship' - sadly, rarely encouraged in The Panoptican Academy these days - only causes trouble apparently.

Posted by: Don Firineach | May 18 2025 23:31 utc | 62

Ahenobarbus --28 "who asks what patriarchy has to do with it?"

Psychohistorian -- "I can't believe you asked the question."

I can. He now has revealed that his already- visible- on- earlier- threads, subjective misogyny dominates his theoretical. He uses Marxism to dismiss race and gender contradictions that intersect with the class contradiction within capitalism. Marxist feminism is a solid theory analysing the patriarchal origins and practices of capitalist accumulation. "Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale", 1986 book by Maria Mies is a place to begin to educate oneself.

Also,"You can feed all the blacks, women and gays you like into the Imperialist elite and you will invariably get pro war, pro billionaire, pro genocide monsters." Ahenobarbus

This is a simplistic distortion. Nobody is saying that women, blacks and gays can't be imperialist. And, so you think Haiti and African countries like DRC don't see white supremacy as an essential component of imperialism?

Posted by: Lavieja | May 18 2025 23:34 utc | 63

36 Don Bacon --"How boring would life be if we all had the same opinions, and not only at horse races."

When did cursing people out and hurling obscenities become 'opinions'?

Posted by: Lavieja | May 18 2025 23:45 utc | 64

36 Don Bacon --"How boring would life be if we all had the same opinions, and not only at horse races."

When did cursing people out and hurling obscenities become 'opinions'?

Posted by: Lavieja | May 18 2025 23:45 utc | 65

Re who will invade which China? Taiwan under Chiang Kai-shek tried to invade the mainland in 1950 from Burma. It was a total failure, but typically Ku- Min-tang, it flourised in the drug business. (See Gibson and Chen, Secret Army, 2011). The post-commie mainland is very unlikely to invade Taiwan. They haven't tried in the decades since 1949 and the status quo gives the leaders in Beijing everthing they way.

A US invasion, excused by a phony PRC incident is the mostly likely. Think of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Are Trump's generals dumb enough? Many are eager.

Posted by: lester | May 18 2025 23:50 utc | 66

Here's an excellent look at Iran's domestic power situation by IAEA, 2022. It's too much data for layman-me, but apparently provides excellent reasoning on why Iran is wanting to keep its nuclear power.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2025 23:55 utc | 67

60,61. I like Mao's formulation. 'It's a zigzag path.' But it does move toward socialism if the majority of humanity is to survive imo.

Posted by: Lavieja | May 19 2025 0:05 utc | 68

Socialism is hard to pull off without hard men with iron wills leading the way.

Ideologues are of little value in the revolution phase.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 19 2025 0:26 utc | 69

Jeremy Rhymings-Lang @50: "What is “political science”?"

Political science majors are to science what sanitation engineers are to engineering.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 19 2025 0:40 utc | 70

🇷🇺 China is fleeing US bonds and now holds fewer than the UK.

“In China, reasonable people run the central bank, not puppets of Washington’s financial institutions.” — Sergey Glazyev

25-year graph of USD Treasury holdings
https://x.com/apocalypseos/status/1924255521273794591

Posted by: LoveDonbass | May 19 2025 1:20 utc | 71

@Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Sun, 18 May 2025 21:44:00 GMT | 50

and it got me wondering: do we have any graduates/PHD’s in “political science” lurking or contributing?

I have one, in international relations, and I believe Roger Boyd does as well.

Because I’m wondering what, exactly, “political science” is? Does it have well-established and well-known experimental frameworks? Is there a system of peer review for new concepts, theories or discoveries? Where is the historical archive of research (and sometimes blunder) that exists for something like chemical, biological or physical sciences?

Is it even a real science? Or is it a meal-ticket for pumping out low-grade essays and articles for publication in Mighty Western Wurlitzer organs?Because I’m wondering what, exactly, “political science” is? Does it have well-established and well-known experimental frameworks? Is there a system of peer review for new concepts, theories or discoveries? Where is the historical archive of research (and sometimes blunder) that exists for something like chemical, biological or physical sciences?

I assume you're being genuine and not snide in your commentary, so I will enlighten you. Political science, or politics outside the US, is an academic discipline, and is the systematic, and scientific, study of political interactions within and between polities. Is it "scientific"? Yes, it follows the scientific method. It is also, mostly, highly quantified, utilizing econometrics, game theory, advanced statistics, and that sort of thing. There are frameworks, there are theories, there is a vast body of literature, the tapestry of all human history is its archive, from which it draws upon.

The difference between the human/social sciences, and the natural sciences is that humans are reflective, they are not static. They think about their "condition" and this changes them, and thus, how they are studied. Unlike ants, or rocks, or gases, or clumps of asteroids, which take millions of years, perhaps, to "change", if they ever do. It seems fairly straightforward to study a rock, or a colony of ants, or a chemical compound, but not so with humans. This is why the social sciences are rarely understood in the context of "science." But rest assured political science is definitely a science.

Posted by: James M. | May 19 2025 1:31 utc | 72

@60 aleph_null

Hegel is notoriously opaque. One need only crack open the Phenomenology and turn to any page and you will be helplessly scratching your head if you are not already scratching your butt.

I don't think we should look at Hegel through topical political movements. Hegel's thought seems to encompass not just the charting of the individual but also society through time. To extrapolate on this point, Heidegger remarked that Kierkegaard and Marx were the greatest Hegelians, despite their better wishes (his essay, Hegel and the Greeks).

Now if what you are saying is that there exists powers and principalities that exist in the world that come onto the scene and seek to delay, destroy, or render impotent the unfolding of spirit in the Hegelian system, can we not say that they have embarked on a fool's errand?

If we chart humanity's progress by say an archive of philosophical works in a library for cloistered intellectuals, then I think we are missing what Hegel is saying. Philosophy is not just words that exist in a drawer on paper but rather a force that is constantly at play in spirit. But if all the philosophers in the world were nuked including all the works of philosophers, leaving only the animalistic immediacy of hominid dominance-games and power structures, maybe that would be a set-back, according to your post.

But if there is no earthly vessel on the scene yet to carry world spirit into its next phase, then so be it. It does not mean that world spirit is dead. Dormant, certainly. It waits patiently though, because it has the element of the eternal in it.

But if there were a way to measure the absolute mathematical certainty of progress in the Hegelian system, meaning having a Geiger counter to measure how liberal we currently exude/embody/inhabit (Hegel believed the Liberal system was the end point of societal arrangement), then certainly some decades would be worse than others, maybe? However, Hegel's notion of the slaughterbench seems to disregard any higher value for bloodshed, whether of innocents or what have you.

So I guess I am at a loss whether I view progress in the same way you do.

Traditional Catholics, for which I have exchanged time with over my years, seem to believe that if we go back, things would get better.

I, on the other hand, would have to offer what VVP said wrt the USSR: those who do not mourn it have no heart, those who want to see it again have no brain.

We are moving forward. I can't see what's next.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | May 19 2025 1:33 utc | 73

@William Gruff | Mon, 19 May 2025 00:40:00 GMT | 70

Political science majors are to science what sanitation engineers are to engineering.

Spoken like a true ignoramus.

'It is better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.'

Posted by: James M. | May 19 2025 1:33 utc | 74

@James M. | May 19 2025 1:31 utc | 72

Your points taken.

I suspect Jeremy was being somewhat flippant but he can speak for himself ..

My response was also somewhat flippant - but not totally so.

There are limits to the 'scientific method' when it comes to the 'human sciences' - the history of ideas - which I'm sure you are 'hopefully' aware of. I won't mention philosophy - Look at history of economics, psychology, sociology etc and I suspect, but not qualified to say so for sure - in the social science known as 'political science' - and based on the foundational assumptions - the points of departure.

A little humility perhaps - and I won't mention the reams of waffle on various forms of 'democracy' - Money, Power and Lifeworld maybe? Even Habermas hasn't figured it out! Dynamic - yes. Time and Context - yes. Power - yes. History - yes. Ideology - most certainly

You mention Roger Boyd - an astute and very interdisciplinary commenter who takes Power and Class seriously - again, he can speak for himself.

Posted by: Don Firineach | May 19 2025 2:03 utc | 75

Posted by: Lavieja | May 18 2025 23:34 utc | 63

Also,"You can feed all the blacks, women and gays you like into the Imperialist elite and you will invariably get pro war, pro billionaire, pro genocide monsters." Ahenobarbus

This is a simplistic distortion. Nobody is saying that women, blacks and gays can't be imperialist. And, so you think Haiti and African countries like DRC don't see white supremacy as an essential component of imperialism?

Well said, with a sharply pointed question to finish. Not acquainted with Mies, but my guess is someone who can ignore Engels Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State will have no problem ignoring a woman. I must add that the notion that the ruling class doesn't already have women, in the form of wives, widows and daughters, or gays is astounding...while forgetting that women and gays are just as much part of the working classes has a reactionary political purpose. And so does talking about so-called elites, rather than class proper. It's the bourgeoisie, in particular the big bourgeoisie that constitutes the ruling class, by power of their ownership of property (including finance capital.) Blacks being fed into so-called elites, yes, but getting to be billionaires and multi-billionaires and great landowners? Not so much. Blacks don't even get fed so much into the petty bourgeoisie!

Backtracking a little, I suggest that the Trotskyite wrecker is even more exposed @28

Opposition to "patriarchy" is a hall mark of the Imperialist Dems and their identity politics.

Singling out one party of the duopoly in my view functions to deny that there is a ruling class, inflating one of the ruling class party's into a propaganda villain, covertly implying the another ruling class party somehow isn't. Promotion of patriarchy I think is a hall mark of imperialist Republicans. For instance, Hegseth purging the officer corps of women in the name of promoting a warrior ethos celebrating lethality, aka cruelty and war crimes, is promoting patriarchy. Warriors are rulers, patriarchs in arms. Soldiers, people who will obey orders and defend the whole nation, are not. A people's army is not a particularly Marxist notion, as it dates back to the great days of bourgeois revolution in the Netherlands, and England, and America, and France (not to mention 1848, the Mexican revolution, the Chinese revolution in its early days, even in its way the Turkish revolution of Ataturk. Patriarchy has a great deal to do with militarism, which has a great deal to do with imperialism. Trying to rule out even the question is more about hack partisan defense of one of the ruling class parties...in my opinion.

Posted by: steven t johnson | May 19 2025 2:29 utc | 76

On the exchange about the status of political science as a science? Judging from biology, where there are frauds trying to defend reaction in guise of disputing the scientific status of evolutionary theory, one pervasive issue in political science is that reactionaries keep reviving unscientific notions with pseudoscience, and obfuscating any issue, less scientific progress support a profoundly critical view of the status quo, lest hoi polloi draw improper conclusions. This is even more obvious in economics I think.

In some ways, any social science has the wikipedia problem, people with ulterior motives will try to put in their apologetics and suppress---or drown out---unwelcome facts and questions.

Posted by: steven t johnson | May 19 2025 2:36 utc | 77

There are limits to the 'scientific method' when it comes to the 'human sciences' - the history of ideas - which I'm sure you are 'hopefully' aware of.
Posted by: Don Firineach | May 19 2025 2:03 utc | 75

Yes of course, there are differences. But is the scientific method at its base form? Make an observation, postulate a hypothesis based on said observation, test said hypothesis using appropriate metrics, determine if it is logically sound and falsifiable, or discard it as unworkable. All the social and physical sciences do this to some degree.

We may differ over the rigor of our methodologies, but the basics of science are the same. I suspect some of the rancor over political “science” is over the use of the word “science” in the name of the discipline. But this is mostly only used by American political scientists. In the UK where I got my degree , they drop the science and just call it politics.

Also, you have to call people who study political processes something. Politician is already taken, and defines something else. I guess you could call them politicists, like chemists or botanists or geologists, but that sounds weird. I don’t think it will catch on. Myself- I prefer the term international relations specialist, as that distinct from the Americanist and the theorists.

Posted by: James M. | May 19 2025 2:39 utc | 78

@James M. | May 19 2025 2:39 utc | 78

OK James - International Relations Specialist it is.

How you doin? Have a Jameson or a Hennessy ...? On me.

That said, I do hope you escape from the shackles of Plato's Popperian Cave every now and then - pause for a while under the sun (or the rain), gaze at the sea and the stars and simply wonder at the sheer wonder of it all.

Posted by: Don Firineach | May 19 2025 3:01 utc | 79

I find Mike Mihajlovic's latest "Wagah" essay interesting.

Mike's excellent exposé on Serbia's shooting down and damaging F117s with antiquated radar and S75s is well worth the read.

Which is why the latest is such a disappointment.

We know the S300s and 400s are not invincible.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/06/12/ukrainian-atacms-rockets-are-blowing-up-russias-best-s-400-air-defenses-as-fast-as-the-s-400s-can-deploy-to-crimea/

Rafales were shot down.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/india-loses-two-fighter-jets-in-pakistan-strikes-experts-confirm/W6SOOSNB6JHCTLJ23R2HORLTGA/

The article's main thrust appears to be that there is no proof of Chinese weaponry effectiveness.

Meanwhile China's Huawei has gone 10G.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/new-zealand/china-launches-worlds-first-10g-broadband-network/articleshow/120480169.cms?from=mdr

Posted by: Suresh | May 19 2025 3:32 utc | 80

China is fleeing US bonds and now holds fewer than the UK.

The decline is even more striking when one plots against Chinese GDP over those 25 years.

BTW - 10 year treasury showing a tick above 4.5% as of late Sunday night NYC time.

Posted by: Exile | May 19 2025 5:15 utc | 81

Some great stuff posted here. Thanks to b and contributing barflies.

MOATS, Ep 448, with George Galloway

https://x.com/georgegalloway/status/1924174288875036853

"SUPER SUNDAY"

Posted by: JohnGilberts | May 19 2025 7:01 utc | 82

@ persiflo | May 18 2025 23:22 utc | 61
@ NemesisCalling | May 19 2025 1:33 utc | 73

Thanks for interesting thoughts on Hegel and progressivism. Hedges’ column posits Gaza as conclusive proof, perhaps, that human progress is not a thing:

Gaza puts to rest the lie of human progress, the myth that we are evolving morally. Only the tools change. Where once we clubbed victims to death, or chopped them to pieces with broadswords, today we drop 2,000-pound bombs on refugee camps, spray families with bullets from militarized drones or pulverize them with tank shells, heavy artillery and missiles.

I could add: where once we ruined a watershed here and there, today we bring down the curtain on a living ocean, foreboding the demise of a living planet. God works in mysterious ways his wonders to behold, and that old-fashioned Christian faith is something Hegel (born and died a theologian) could never let go of -- an irrational kernel of Christian faith which, by extension, infects Marxism as well.

It might be worthwhile to cut through the opacity, turn on the light and put progress on the examination table. Ronald Wright wrote of progress traps humanity impales itself on. Whether we consider progress good or bad is an open question. It doesn’t matter what we call it. What matters is the disempowering mechanism Blanqui elucidates: that if we trust God or progress to take care of things for us, we’re luxuriating in intellectual laziness, reverting to infantile sloth.

Posted by: Aleph_Null | May 19 2025 7:36 utc | 83

Is this a good summary of recent elections in Romania and Moldova?

On 20 october 2024, Maia Sandu is elected as president of Moldova.
She loses the vote in Moldova itself, but gets elected because of the vote of Moldovans living abroad.

On 18 May 2025, Nicusor Dan is elected president of Romania.
He loses the vote in Romania itself, but gets elected because of the vote of Romanian nationals living abroad - mainly Moldova.

Posted by: Passerby | May 19 2025 9:00 utc | 84

One aspect of progress today would be elucidated by the word STOP. This would apply to many areas of the current activities of states, but applied to one specific activity of humans on the planet, would be to STOP ALL DEVELOPMENT by the industrialized and over-industrialized states. In order for this to be possible, socialist internationalism would be necessary. For example, then, if more processing facilities for rare earths were necessary, they could only be built in the countries where the metals were extracted, so would be built, operated, and worked by citizens of that country. If a country were too developed such that any more construction would be injurious to the environment, it would have to purchase the commodity from an undeveloped country. Then, of course, weapons production would have to be STOPPED, and whatever exists destroyed or equally distributed through our the world. This begins to sound absurdly utopian. Maybe it was from the beginning...I apologize if ears were bent, but after all, it's said to be a bar. Point is, progress is only progressive based upon specific circumstances.

Posted by: Lavieja | May 19 2025 9:00 utc | 85

I hope the kinetic part is the death of global private finance and all its worthless tit suckers.

I like the concept of humans measured by merit and not inheritance and exceptionalism. I support building a world that deprecates barbarism, patriarchy and inequality of countries.

Has society seen enough colonialist ugly now to insure that social organization energy does not manifest itself in our future forms of collectivism?

Evidently the RoW is not revulsed enough yet to make it stop.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 18 2025 15:54 utc | 23

100% and pure common sense

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Unfortunately, common sense is losing out to the ideologues. This is what economics is all about

Here:

https://billmitchell.org/blog/?p=62568

Moving skills and real resources around with little impact on communities. But the ideologues won't allow that debate to happen. Instead they promote the tax payer money myth, deficit and debt myths to stop change from happening. That banks and businesses should have the first choice of skills and real resources that are available.

Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | May 19 2025 9:08 utc | 86

@ Posted by: Cynic | May 18 2025 19:21 utc | 45

Thanks for the response. You ask

“Did Marx, Lenin or Trotsky ever demand such a thing as mass-immigration just for its own sake? 
If not, then where, by who and when was such an ideological peculiarity cobbled up?”

Now I’ll take that as a straight question (instead of perhaps ‘left’ baiting)
The simple answer is it wasn’t that bunch of ziofascist banker tools - it was earlier with the conquistadors!

The Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch etc… Brits and the Belgians (always the dastardly Belgians!) - do you suppose that there was some kind of a left/right made up dichotomy in these monarchic/imperialist endeavours too?

It was then as is now the same old ziofascist Money Dynasties expanding their AngloEuropean imperial muscles.

The Global robber barons and pirate slavers who have always ‘farmed’ people for their dynasties.

Do you think the 5 eyes (minus GB) plus the illegal apartheid entity is NOT ‘Mass’ migration?

All these places where settlers were dragged and encouraged to exploit the lands, resources and natives?

Are they different to the supposed swamping and the bullshit ‘replacement’ button pushing, red rag that is now prevalent in the modus operandi of the supremacist ziofascist collective waste Narratives; as it attempts to bridge the left/right, into the Red/Brown fascist nationalist imperial forces again?

Ultimately a self destruction further conquistador forces - to defend their ancient imperial conquests - most notably in Africa.

Why do you suppose so many of the recent arrivals are very young African males? Recruited as boy soldiers already by mercenaries through the Sahel and sub Saharan countries. Western Mercenaries pretending to be isis!

They are being brought to the West to be indoctrinated as imperial soldiers because they will be the boots on the grounds in their homelands. Traitors raised to kill their family, kin and neighbours for the forever fascists, banker ZioImperialists.

I hope that answers your query?

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 19 2025 9:11 utc | 87

@ Posted by: S.P. Korolev | May 18 2025 21:27 utc | 48

Lol. That’s a lot more succinct than my response (truly Medvedevian!).

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 19 2025 9:13 utc | 88

Posted by: Lavieja | May 19 2025 9:00 utc | 85

Spooky !!!

That link provided above in response to psychohistorian. Explains exactly the point you are making Lavieja.

But try and get your point across to the libtards and right wingers who spread nothing but myths to keep bankers and businesses in charge.

Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | May 19 2025 9:17 utc | 89

@Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | May 18 2025 21:53 utc | 53

It could be worse it could be PPE!

It allows a fast track progression to government as intern >spad>superspad>helicopter candidate to safe constituency>junior minister>corporate revolving door>sprog with a fellow minion>repeat.

I know a political ‘scientist’ straight into government- they are supposed to understand statistics and science- one waxed about AI , an expert because he went to a talk where KingofMars Elon spoke. Supposedly authoring the definitive government guidance on AI (for other government departments). They promised to explain AI to me - still waiting - I doubt that they’ll even understand what a LLM is and how exactly it operates at software nevermind hardware levels. Like I say many are just kids of placemen already being ushered into a cushy career path to be politicians more than actual scientists!

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 19 2025 9:20 utc | 90

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 19 2025 9:11 utc | 87

It can be summarised as thus ....

The right wing ideological belief system that government is just another organisation in the system that has to compete for resources by price. That Business and banks always get first choice of resources and government has to make do with the scraps. They believe the bankers and businesses should be in charge and that the population are just factors of production to be shifted around, like ingots of steel, as business requires.

Just like the Wild West when big landowners were in charge. Or the highlands of Scotland when the clan chiefs were in charge.

They use the tax payer money myths, deficits and debt myths to ensure it stays that way.

The truth is ...

Where a nation has its own currency, runs its own central bank, floats its currency on the currency markets and has no material state-owned debt in any other denomination, the government controlling the currency is in charge and sets the rules of the game.

You can determine that business and banks are servants of the people. Government can take first choice of resources for the public purpose, then allow business and banks to work with what is left, before hoovering up any left over resources with a Job Guarantee.

The public wrap of the private system provides a containment vessel around the nuclear power of capitalism. We can draw its power without the boom. We can fuel it with public investment and improve the power output.

The focus of government action shifts from money to the actual things we need to buy for the public purpose. Smart people talk about government buying, not spending.

From this, government sets the policy for spending and taxation at a level that allows the Job Guarantee and other auto-stabilisation mechanisms (such as standby investment contracts) to function.

It must be known that monetary policy is largely useless as a stabilisation device, and what is known as the horizontal circuit (“bank money”) should be left to operate as a market rather than being manipulated all the time. Therefore you leave the base rate at the natural rate of 0% and stop artificially trying to hold it above that, particularly stop moving it around.

What that means is that government stops paying banks “welfare on reserves” payments. No Interest on Reserves. No Bond Coupons. Any income banks earn they have to get by discounting collateral in the private economy and charging for that service (aka making loans).

System stabilisation can then be done using the vertical circuit (“central bank money”) which is added and removed as required to commercial bank’s balance sheets and forcibly creates additional bank deposits in the hands of individuals - because bank money is pegged one-to-one to central bank money.

The result is that the bank money system operates within a containment vessel defined by fixed banking policies, not ones that change month to month, and the banking system ebbs and flows within the policy boundaries, with the government’s vertical system countercyclically matching the ebb and flow.

This is where the Job Guarantee sits. The wage is paid with vertical money and matches the ebb and flow of bank money spending countercyclically. But importantly it does the same thing on the production side with labour hours - injecting and removing labour hours countercyclically with private and public sector demand keeping labour hours near constant relative to the working population.

A guaranteed alternative job replaces bank credit manipulation as the stabilisation process. The production system gets a change in output, not a dead loss. You get income in your pocket, not a private sector debt millstone around your neck.

And that’s how you get to true full employment and price stability within an economic system where demand is satisfied.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It is just pure common sense economics. Should keep everybody happy.

I personally would go further and simply nationalise the banks and get rid of the FIRE sector completely. When you set the interest rate to zero permanently then you don't need competition in banking.

Whatever you borrow from the nationalised bank that's what you pay back free of interest. If you borrow £100 you pay back £100.

Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | May 19 2025 9:36 utc | 91

The US 10-year government bond now at 4.55%, UK above 4.7%, both not sustainable given probable nominal GDP growth and the scale of government deficits. But Trump wants his "big beautiful" deficit sustaining and probably growing, budget.

The Japanese 10-year yield has gone from -0.22% to +1.488%, which may not seem much bit is a definite problem with government debt at 263% of GDP, the deficit at 4% of GDP, GDP growth of 0.1% and falling, and inflation of 3.6% and falling.

Posted by: Roger Boyd | May 19 2025 9:43 utc | 92

Posted by: Roger Boyd | May 19 2025 9:43 utc | 92

This is a fantastic example of using tax payer money myths, deficit and debt myths for ideological purposes.

You are pointing at these figures and you have no idea what they mean.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Now point to Eurozone figures who hold foreign debt in Euros and who can't issue their own currency. Or countries who have pegged their currencies.

Using context explain the massive difference. Learn what full monetary sovereignty means.

Here:

https://billmitchell.org/blog/?p=3921

The fact that the government voluntary decides to constrain itself by issuing debt $-for-$ into private markets using auction systems is never mentioned by the ideologues. Because they love nothing more than constraining elected governments.

Yet, they point to these numbers like an ideological witch doctor.

It could avoid issuing the debt altogether and the central bank would be able to structure whatever rates it wants. But ideologues won't mention this.

What these ideologically driven (pointers at numbers) free from any context are trying to achieve is make people believe
that eventually the interest burden becomes so great that the government loses its capacity to service it.

This is their whole travelling circus. The household budget fallacy. Everything works like a household budget. Only ever looking at one side of the balance sheet.

The truth That would be a “pure operational constraint” and suggest that the sovereign government is not 100 per cent solvent (technically) in its own currency.

In other words bullshit!

If they are saying when they point at these numbers without any context that at some point the interest payments as a % of GDP become so large and private sector spending is such that there is less non-inflationary room available for other discretionary spending.

Then fine that is what taxation is for – to reduce private spending and/or the government can reduces its own spending somewhat. But before that happens the current account, tax collection (from higher activity) and private sector saving ratios will be taking up a signifcant part of that adjustment.

But whoopiefuckingdo.

All this is just saying is that prudent government net spending is limited by the available skills and real resources in the economy left by private sector and foreign saving desires.

There is also a certain irony that the voluntary decision to issue debt $-for-$ to match net spending then increases spending towards the inflation threshold. But don't mention that because the ideologues like the government constrained.

If they are saying while pointing at numbers without any context that the public and the commentators etc are so conditioned that they will invoke political consequences on a government that has a debt ratio above some “acceptable” level then that is a political constraint – which doesn’t reflect any financial reality or any physical reality (real resource capacity).

These fools never admit if a government which wanted to reduce its debt exposure it could just stop issuing debt. Which is nothing but a left over from the Gold standard , fixed exchange rate regime.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You will never hear them say any of this. Their speciality is pointing at numbers without context. Spreading the household fallacy along with deficits and debt myths. Mixing up fully monetary sovereign countries with Eurozone countries and juggle fruit. Apple's with Oranges.

Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | May 19 2025 10:27 utc | 93

If households desire to net save in the currency of issue.

Businesses desire to net save in the currency of issue.

Foreigners who export to you desire to net save in the currency of issue.

Then government has no option but to run budget deficits in order to meet those non government sectors saving desires.

Then because of ideological insanity government voluntary decides to constrain itself by issuing debt $-for-$ into private markets using auction systems to match the deficits. As if we were still in the Gold standard And use fixed exchange rates.

Insanity !

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And then they have the sheer audacity to point at numbers without any context.

Normal sane people just stand back in awe of their ignorance. Wonder how humanity could become so stupid.

Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | May 19 2025 10:43 utc | 94

Belgians - the original mercenaries and nasties.

Guillame Le batard fil de Robert de Falaise wouldn’t have got very far invading proto England without them.

Incase anyone is wondering why I am highlighting this little nation as the major criminal of Europe - some breaking news.

‘ -- GEROMAN -- time will tell - 👀 --
@GeromanAT
2h
As part of a new €1 billion aid package for Ukraine, €645 million of which is being channeled through the Belgian defense industry, Ukraine will receive Leopard 1A5BEs with the new Cockerill C3105 turret from Belgium for testing.

This turret is equipped with a 105 mm cannon with an automatic loader, a digital fire control system and stabilization, can use modern ammunition (including programmable ones) and is installed on platforms with limited carrying capacity.

Interestingly, this turret was previously used on the Indonesian Harimau and Indian Zorowar – light tanks with high mobility and a small silhouette.

The delivery of the Leopard with the new turret is seen as a potential step towards a deep modernization of the old fleet of Leopard 1, of which Ukraine already has more than a hundred.

Belgium is also investing in training Ukrainian ground personnel to service the F-16, training pilots and sappers, and, in cooperation with Ukrainian enterprises, launching the production of 70-mm unguided rockets.

Military analytics 🇺🇦 TG
May 19, 2025 · 8:13 AM UTC ‘

Posted by: DunGroanin | May 19 2025 10:57 utc | 95

A concise summary of Pak/Indian war...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw45wiq7Acs

[8.30]

Posted by: denk | May 19 2025 11:48 utc | 96

Our life support systems have been eroded and weakened to the point that we are half-conscious addicts hooked on poisonous inputs that provide the dopamine we need to carry on until the next fix. The main vectors-- food, stories and online "friends". Biden, one of our former superheroes, has cancer and will soon die. The imperial West will follow and we-- its resident addicts-- will squirm as our stories fall apart and our bodies fill with more poison and our "friends" fall apart and fade away.
Unplug.
Get more comfortable with fewer "friends".
Nurture authentic conversations and become hardened to the disappointment, rejection and shunning of people who don't like what you say.
Eat as wild and clean as possible. Cut out the corn syrup, processed crap.
It is possible that a new world is coming. Prepare and train for it.
Pay attention to the non-human living beings. We can learn from them if we humble ourselves.

Posted by: migueljose | May 19 2025 12:13 utc | 97

76 Steven t johnson--"Blacks being fed into so-called elites, yes, but getting to be billionaires and multi-billionaires and great landowners? Not so much. Blacks don't even get fed so much into the petty bourgeoisie."

Appreciate your pointing this out. About the question of class, race and gender, I do think it's the case that women and gays, are more readily assimilated into the ruling class than blacks.

More than a case of 'ignoring women,' it was the following quote from the Victory Day thread that revealed a subjective prejudice: "the Guardian is like a dithering old woman that changes her opinion like she changes outfits".

Posted by: Lavieja | May 19 2025 12:56 utc | 98

I'm not really up for such heavy matters as these but have trouble not saying the following :D

Decent conversation on political science, the social sciences, and progress as an idea and a thing. I'll leave those aside except to point out that they can be seen as "younger" in various ways, especially by the metric of man-hours invested in repeatable experiments building upon each other —which might perhaps be the crucial metric— and this because doing so in any ethical (or maybe even unethical) manner is difficult in other ways than for example High Energy Physics or discovering the amplituhedron is difficult. This relates to the mentioned changes, the problems inherent to studying "oneself" and changing by doing so.

I wanted to mention something entirely different.

As someone nondenominational who believes in God I think what Aleph_Null is talking about is something that should/could be called "passive believers". It is something I certainly hope/wish I am not.

There is a very big difference between believing God has (already had (spacetime does not apply)) the ultimate say and "will take care of everything" and turning that into a reason to be passive, uncaring, not to strive or sacrifice, not try to be better at whatever one holds dear such as kindness, understanding, gratitude, etc. or whatever one is any good or decent at or for that matter criticism of whatever one opposes.

In conclusion I now have three forms/failures of faith I dislike: "false faith" (deceit and treason, not really faith at all), "blind faith" (not using or listening to your mind and heart), and "passive faith" (not making any effort in a world full of challenges).

Thank you Aleph_Null, I now have a little bit more clarity than I had before :)

Also just a note that I do not mind agnosticism or atheism in themselves in the slightest but their application (just as most things) can be both positive/constructive and negative/destructive.

Perhaps even more importantly the limitations on any human no matter how smart or wise or knowledgeable in comparison to the complexity of objectivity/reality and vastness of subjective experience eradicates (by its near-infinite ratio) most or maybe all distinctions we create through names or otherwise: we are all ultimately exceptionally ignorant in comparison to all there is to know but/and if we can manage to treat each other well despite all of that then we're okay as far as I am concerned (currently we as a species do not).

Maybe the distance from such a goal (and/or others) is the easiest way to measure progress?

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | May 19 2025 14:16 utc | 99

India harbours a massive delusion about its military, wittingly bolstered by myriad western 'think tanks', 'military experts', who routinely rank Indian military above China, sometime by a large margin !

For example, just before the 7-5 air war, an IAF top brass proudly boasted Indian 'superiority' over the PLAAF , citing a military ranking website from the USAss !

The North American injun found out pale face speak with forked tongue more than 300 hundred years ago, when'd the Indians learn their lesson ?

Posted by: denk | May 19 2025 14:20 utc | 100