Rixsaw

@RodDMartin If only we could convince Scientists to believe in the well documented resurrection of Jesus which had 500+ witnesses, and the first photograph, as much as they have faith in Global X.

This is your monthly reminder that congress gave @PeteButtigieg $2 TRILLION to fix infrastructure and nobody knows where the money all went. That’s 135 nuclear aircraft carriers worth of cash. Poof.

@InsiderGeo So you want trump to make up a lie? You ask a very unsubtle question to Trump that has a really fucking obvious answer, and you will get an unsubtle answer to your question. It was the Reporter that asked us to reveal our strategy on world stage.

People often don’t realize that you can’t talk to Asians the same way you talk to Europeans or Westerners. There’s a cultural expectation that historical context, respect, and subtlety are treated differently what might seem casual or humorous in the West is deeply offensive in Japan, In Japan, context, respect, and subtlety guide almost every interaction. Unlike in many Western countries, where directness is valued, Japanese communication often relies on reading between the lines.

@dollymad1812 @AdamJSchwarz @joncoopertweets He isn't racist, the fuck is wrong with your brain Dolly. Reminding a country they surprised us in history and how ironic it is for them to ask the question of why we would do it, has nothing to do with race... It was Genius.

@AdamJSchwarz @joncoopertweets It wasn’t a gaffe. Trump did it on purpose because he has no filter and he’s racist. It’s why his base loves him so much.

Reporter: Why didn't you notify Japan that you were going to attack Iran? Trump next to the Japanese PM: "Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Why didn't you tell me about Pearl Habour? You believe in surprise I think much more so than us."

@athenaeumbc Okay I'll bite what about Asimov and Orson Scott Card, or do geniuses have to be ancient and dead before you recognize their contribution?

Since Elon shared our post, thousands of you joined our book club, so we thought now is a good time to remind you of our mission.. We live in a time of noise, speed, and amnesia. Few remember where we came from, and fewer still care to ask. But without active memory, a culture dies. Athenaeum was founded to resist this death. We are a home for readers who still believe that ideas matter: that Augustine, Dante, Shakespeare, and Dostoevsky are not just names in a syllabus, but guides to a deeper and more ordered life. This is the kind of reading that sharpens the mind and strengthens the spirit. Western Civilization has given us the greatest works ever written, but it takes effort to read them, and even more to read them well. That’s what we’re doing here — slowly, together. If you want to support our efforts, please consider a paid subscription. It makes a huge difference to the time and resources we can dedicate to this project. Paid members get: - Live community book discussions (biweekly) - Deep-dive essays to guide you through the books we’re reading - The full archive of book reviews, essays, and our 100 Great Texts reading list - Access to all community discussion threads (via the subscriber chat) - Ability to vote on what we read next This is not school. There are no grades, no credentials, and no status games. Just a community of readers serious about recovering what’s been lost, and using it to build something better. Welcome!

I think diplomacy is very important... Like the diplomacy we are doing now where we say "Come get ur oil bitches" and we laugh and watch as Europe comes to the obvious conclusion to help us as it is in their actual b est interest. Do we call it diplomacy when french men need about a week to figure out they are screwed? I guess we do now.

@Rix6145 @pegobry_en We he doesn't expect you to help afterwards. I guess diplomacy is important when you have things to ask

I think it should say something that I’m one of the most pro-Trump, pro-American Europeans in existence, and *I’m* just so pissed off. "I don’t care, your continent is shit, your economy is shit, your military is shit." Ok. Then leave. I’m French, I’m Gaullist, so I can say this. Don’t like NATO? Leave! We have nukes, we have energy independence, we’ll be fine. Leave! Get. The fuck. Out. If you’re so unhappy, leave. You’re like a wife that keeps threatening her husband with divorce even though we both know you’re not going to do it. You’re so unhappy? Door’s here. Leave.

@GeorgeWarwick12 @johnkonrad Ohhh come on we aren't talking about the fucking unelected demonic thought police that put Iran in charge of the human rights council you.... Unintelligent person.. THE UN is NOT InTernational law this is

@Rix6145 @johnkonrad A blockade is illegal if not sanctioned by International law. There are rules. Sinking civilian ships is a crime. I hope we don’t descend to such depravity.

“And if the regime survives, Trump loses any chance to control the Strait of Hormuz” This framing is wrong. The President cannot “lose” control of the strait. He can choose not to exercise it. Those are different things. My naval sources confirm the Navy is stretched thin but has significant assets that could deploy on an emergency basis to reopen the strait. The question is not capability. It is risk. Deploying assets currently in reserve or stationed in other theaters removes them from the board if a second crisis erupts elsewhere. That is one risk. Another: ships like the LCS minesweepers carry far fewer defensive systems than a destroyer. How many American sailors are we willing to put in harm’s way to accelerate the timeline by weeks? There are other operational risks as well, and I am convinced the Navy could reopen the strait in a reasonable timeframe by accepting more of them. But there is a more important point that the current debate is missing entirely. The U.S. does not need to sweep the strait to “control” it. What is undeniable is that the U.S. Navy could far more easily and effectively prevent Iranian ships from leaving. This is not hypothetical. There is direct historical precedent. In World War I, Britain faced exactly this problem. Close blockade of German ports had become suicidal. Mines, submarines, torpedoes, and coastal guns made stationing warships near shore too dangerous. So the Admiralty adopted what historians call a “distant blockade”: rather than hovering off enemy harbors, the Royal Navy sealed the English Channel and the northern approaches to the North Sea, intercepting and inspecting merchant ships far from German shores. Britain was careful never to call it a “blockade” officially, precisely to sidestep the legal requirements of the 1856 Paris Declaration. It worked. By war’s end, Germany’s imports had collapsed and hundreds of thousands of civilians starved. The parallel to Hormuz is direct. The U.S. Navy does not need to push minesweepers through a 21-mile contested strait to deny Iran the benefits of maritime commerce. It can stand off at distance in the Gulf of Oman or the Arabian Sea and interdict Iranian-flagged vessels under the belligerent right of visit and search, which is well established under the San Remo Manual and customary international law. Ships carrying Iranian cargo could be hailed, boarded, and diverted. Those that resist inspection can be captured. Enemy merchant vessels can be seized outright. If they attempt to fight back our submarines could sink them. No serious navalist doubts the ability of nuclear subs to sink supertankers. This does not require a declared blockade with all its legal formalities and the danger of occupying the strait. Iran does not “control” the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is selectively permitting Chinese, Turkish, Indian, and Pakistani ships to pass while threatening Western vessels. That is not control. It is a negotiating posture enforced by mines and bluster. The U.S. Navy could shut down every Iranian-flagged vessel on the open ocean tomorrow. Iran cannot do the same to us. Could the United States also force merchant ships to sail through the strait? Operationally, yes. No merchant captain will refuse transit when a SEAL team boards his ship. But this would be legally problematic: the master has an independent duty to his crew and owners under maritime law, and the flag state’s consent matters. I am not saying we should do this. I am saying we could. The bottom line: in no scenario does the United States “lose control” of the strait. The President can surrender the initiative to Iran for political, diplomatic, or legal reasons. But he cannot lose it. The Navy’s ability to impose a distant interdiction on Iranian commerce is not in question. The only question is whether the Commander in Chief orders it.

@HunterStires @johnkonrad And remember we beat the USSR by out spending them, not by assuming we would lose a fight. Some battleships might get sunk, that is part of war.

@Rix6145 @johnkonrad I’m not talking about Iran

Universal rule: the more brutal and effective a weapon platform is, the more the “smartest guys in the room”™️ at the think tanks hate it. See: the recent DEFCON 1 PhD meltdown over Trump Class Battleships.

Okay fine you want to war game a fight against Russia I assume. So lets say they have harpoon missiles or whatever... What would you do if we already had the 20 battleships and this weapon was introduced? Would you scrap the battleships or simply adapt a counter to your existing ships? I don't think that just adding more inches of steel is going to solve the problem. Its too easy for them to add more explosive to their missile. However I don't believe it is smart to remove water born cannons from your arsenal (useful in defending choke points) just because some navy somewhere has missiles.

@HunterStires @johnkonrad You mean the ones that all fell uselessly into the ocean? Weren't they the big concern about attacking Iran?

@Rix6145 @johnkonrad Cheap and producible drones are a problem but have you ever heard of an anti-ship ballistic missile?

@secretsqrl123 What makes you think Trump is in charge of any of this. This is in God's hands it always has been. This is part of the story. Anyway 5000 soldiers are on their way with a weapons platform that can deliver close support and raids.

the US military will win the war in iran, but we are seriously in danger of losing the war. right now everyone knows there is no real plan, the civilians are NOT rising up, the government is still in power and if things don't change it will stay that way. Without calling up the national guard and deploying 2-300,000 ground troops to secure a part of Iran, the mines and rockets will still be a threat. Trump has no good choices right now. And I fear he is about to do something stupid. 1. Call it a win and leave. This would leave the government in Iran far stronger, and China will replace all the gear quickly. This would get us kicked out of the Middle East and the rest of the world would see it as a loss. 2. Deploy ground troops to a forever war with no plan on leaving. Iran is larger than Afghanistan and Iraq, combined. the only plan he had was hope going into this, thats not a plan

@HunterStires @johnkonrad It is likely the only weapon that can be produced and launched in quantity at range in such a way to overwhelm the other defense systems in place.

@Rix6145 @johnkonrad That is not the only question or weapon that is relevant.

@Rory_Johnston What you talking about willis. Oil Price holding stable at under 100 a barrel. US is oil exporter, we are fine. Gas prices are stable...

I still think Trump will TACO—because he *has* to TACO. Oil loss it too big, too politically untenable. While the damage is already extensive and recovery will already be a months-long ordeal, it can get so, so much worse and this is fundamentally a crisis of lost time. People will push back and say it isn't up to Trump anymore. But while there are two other major parties in this war, Trump remains the 1) most important, and 2) most movable by external pressures (like, say, oil prices), so it's gotta be him.

Germany - Shut down all of their nuclear power - Lost all of their Russian gas - Now losing all of their Qatari gas Holy shit it has never been so over for Europe. It is utterly over

@rushicrypto The European Depression of Choice.

If the last one was named “The Great” Depression, what’s this one going to be called?

@HunterStires @johnkonrad Can it survive a hit from a Shaheed Drone. That is the only question that is relevant. If not then add some armor.

@johnkonrad That is the opposite reason why people have concerns about BBGX. Speaking for myself, I am concerned that it’s too large and expensive, is under-armed for its size and expense, and will result in a fleet that in aggregate is smaller, more targetable, and less survivable.

@johnkonrad Why are they this way.

@LestonEric @pegobry_en Trump didn't tell me he was going to strike Iran either...

@Rix6145 @pegobry_en So ? I'm not from that colony.

@TonyLaneNV Armed robbery.... Terrorizing a store clerk... fighting in prison... 25 years is cutting him slack.

18 YEARS OLD… 25 YEARS IN PRISON A Texas teen just got hit with 25 years for a convenience store robbery. The judge made it clear - probation wasn’t even on the table due to his previous record while being held in jail. Said he didn’t have a real chance at success outside. His family broke down in court as the sentence was handed down. At 18… your whole life is just starting - But one decision can change everything forever. Do you think this sentence fits the crime… or is it too much? ⬇️ 🇺🇸

🇮🇷🇺🇸🇨🇳 The Strait of Hormuz closure looks like a global crisis, but the U.S. isn't really the one getting crushed. Prices go up, sure. But the U.S. only uses 20% of global oil and it's a net exporter. So U.S. oil companies are making serious money instead. We're talking up to $63B in extra revenue if prices stay high. ExxonMobil, Chevron, Devon, ConocoPhillips are all eating. Defense stocks popped instantly. Lockheed, Northrop, RTX jumped 4-6% in a day. That's $25-30B added just like that. U.S. oil firms raised $3.5B this month alone. Biggest fundraising in 6+ years. Meanwhile China imports 70% of its oil. Every price spike hits them way harder. So why would Trump rush to fix something when others are feeling it more? Now he's asking countries to help reopen Hormuz, but they need it way more than the U.S. does anyway. That's the leverage. Source: William Spaniel YT, Bloomberg, Seeking Alpha, European Business Magazine

@EricinAmericaX @MarioNawfal Well now we know Chat GPT's opinion LOL... Here is a sober take from someone who knows : x.com/johnkonrad/sta…

Trump is clearly desperate for help; expecting countries that he's repeatedly bullied to come to his aid so he can try to minimize the hit to his ratings. But one moment he's "begging" for aid from allies he's alienated, the next moment he's insulting them and claiming "we don't need em" like a temperamental child. Trump's war of choice is shocking markets and increasing oil prices while achieving nothing in the way of "regime change." His only primary concerns are with how rising prices and market swings are affecting his ratings. His public statements change day to day so he doesn't spook markets. He lies to protect his own interests. Trump's incompetence is on full display here. He obviously didn't prepare for these eventualities in the Persian Gulf. He dismissed concerns about Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz and bombing neighboring countries. Two retaliatory measures he was explicitly warned about. Trump didn't prepare for the disruption of global trade and oil distribution due to Strait closures. He didn't prepare for what would happen if major oil exporters were forced to shut in the wells, or if Iran started blowing up tankers. He didn't consider how this war would impact other countries who rely heavily on the strait of Hormuz for oil trade—some of them our middle east allies who aren't very happy with us right now. Even if the Strait of Hormuz became 100% operational and safe tomorrow, these countries have already shut in oil production. Meaning they can't just magically turn the faucet back on. Major setbacks are INEVITABLE. And keep in mind that oil is a global market, so this whole crisis still affects us regardless of whether we depend on the strait for oil trade. Meaning that higher costs for gas and other goods are unavoidable for Americans. Not to mention the war's $1-2 billion per day price tag for taxpayers. We've unleashed chaos on the market because of the Trump administration's incompetence and poor planning. Meanwhile, The US economy is still a mess. Trump's policies were exploding the debt and deficit BEFORE this phase of the war even began. The White House has been gloating for months about lower prices at the pump. But the primary drivers behind cheaper gas were seasonal demand patterns and the price of crude oil dropping due to global economic slowdown. Under Biden, domestic oil production hit record highs. Trump took credit for this trend. However, not a single Trump policy has contributed to lower costs for most Americans. In fact, the data show that Trump's tariffs are a regressive tax on low income, working and even middle class Americans, and that we are footing over 90% of the tariff bill. As oil prices rise, Trump supporters will go to great lengths to deny Trump's DIRECT involvement, pin it on his predecessors, or claim that this is all part of his "master plan," which is utterly delusional. Trump's decision to go to war with Iran is directly affecting gas prices. For once, Trump's policies are having a measurable impact on the price at the pump. Go figure. During this war, we've been indiscriminately bombing noncombatants, children, schools, hospitals, heritage sites and civilian infrastructure. We're radicalizing our enemies against us. Us troops are DEAD. We've managed to replace the dying Ayatollah with his more hardline son who has deep connections and sway with the IRGC. Residents of Iran are terrified as bombings intensify and as strikes draw closer to their neighborhoods. Trump's messaging is inconsistent and his administration continues to lie about the pretext for this war. An open ended war. A war that ignores lessons about what happens when the US tries "regime change" in the Middle East. An illegal war conducted under FALSE PRETENSES, with little to no support from Americans, and a conflict that was always one of choice. And for what? The US hasn't accomplished anything. Hell, most Americans don't even know why we're at war in the first place!