Pete Nealen

Since I'm still not sure the renaissance of Twitter is going to last, I do have an author newsletter as well. And you even get a free story when you sign up. dl.bookfunnel.com/qswxi8aqt1

Sigh... every time this dude posts I'm convinced he has either lost his mind and is fully working with our enemies, or he was one of the dumbest GB's to ever put on that little green hat. He starts off by failing, once again, to look at this problem strategically from a whole of government standpoint and through DIMEFIL framework. He first issues the claim that there is "no military solution" as an absolute, when in reality the use of military force in Iran was about shaping the conditions to assist in regime change by limiting their capabilities, allowing for freedom of movement for insurgency and anti-regime forces, and offering an example of extreme deterrence to the world based on overwhelming US military dominance, not as the only line of effort. The M in DIMEFIL is just one of the aspects of this strategic engagement, which Joe likely knows, but is ignoring in favor of these ridiculous, elementary level talking points. He then suggests that reopening the Strait of Hormuz would somehow lead to an "endless quagmire," which ignores the long track record of our naval operations successfully protecting shipping lanes without spiraling into occupation level conflict (Operation Earnest Will and Operation Praying Mantis are some great examples). Likewise, the assertion that Iran's regime cannot, and has not, been meaningfully weakened or constrained by targeting their leadership and infrastructure overlooks not only the reality of the current situation, but also decades of evidence that sustained pressure through military strikes and the other aspects of DIMEFIL has altered Iranian behavior at key moments. It's like he either has no knowledge of successful strategic military tactics or he is purposely misleading people... His argument then jumps to a false binary: either immediate concessions "cut a deal now" or catastrophic war later. This is, to put it bluntly, an idiotic way to look at strategic level warfare. I am honestly embarrassed for him, as this limited thinking dismisses the viable middle ground of sustained pressure, deterrence, and coalition based containment that has been the backbone of US strategy in similar situations that have been successful before. Then, blaming "neocons" and Israel for the current situation further oversimplifies a complex geopolitical reality and sidesteps Iran's own actions in destabilizing the region, which is convenient for him and people like him on the Halal Right, who love to blame everyone else but the actual terrorists and our enemies for their many adverse actions. It is exactly what the left does with literally every situation. They refuse to acknowledge the real culprit and rather assign fault to the people trying to offer the solution. And finally, labeling a withdrawal or concession as "strength" is reframing risk avoidance as virtue without addressing the long term consequences of emboldening an adversary that has spent the last near five decades attacking us and our interests abroad. It is pure cowardice and idiocy molded as one. History shows that prematurely conceding leverage often leads to worse deals, not better ones. It doesn't take some brilliant military planner or tactician to understand this very basic and simple concept. So, in short, Joe's post, once again, substitutes absolutism, selective history, and false dilemmas for a "balanced assessment of strategy," making his conclusions both stupid and like trying to solve a chess match by insisting every position is either checkmate or surrender, while ignoring everything happening on the board in between. I, for one, am very happy that this traitorous moron is no longer involved in our government in any way, shape, or form.

@ratlpolicy The combination of disaffected Bernie Bros that "joined up" after the 2016 primaries and the Ron Paulbots kind of made this inevitable, unfortunately.

One of the things I dislike about the second Trump administration is how many apparent anti-American fifth columnists it hired into core national security roles. Glad they fired this one, but there's more work to be done.

Iran reportedly attacked the Fujairah oil terminal. This is the endpoint of the ADCOP pipeline, the UAE's only Hormuz bypass. 1.5 million barrels per day of crude capacity, expandable to 1.8 million. This pipeline was built specifically so the UAE could export oil without transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is not just hitting a coalition partner. They are targeting the infrastructure that lets oil flow without Hormuz. The only other major Hormuz bypass is Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline to Yanbu, which was attacked in April and lost approximately 700,000 barrels per day of throughput. Iran's message is clear. If they cannot export through Hormuz, nobody bypasses it either.

Imagine a world where political prisons no longer exist. No more gulags, no more re-education camps. But tyranny isn’t gone. It’s become pervasive. A prison without walls. One that can lock you out of society with just a tap.

The UAE MOD confirms that the country is currently undergoing an Iranian drone and missile attack. Explosions have been reported across multiple parts of the Emirates, and a petrochemical facility has reportedly been hit in Fujairah.

But that would-be Communist dictator gets the same crocodile tears martyrdom sob story that Mossadegh does.

Hell, Allende in Chile is another example. He barely scraped up 30%, and proceeded to treat it as a Communist mandate, violating the Chilean constitution and nationalizing the economy.

Odds are good that any story about the West "overthrowing a democratically-elected leader" is totalitarian propaganda. Pretty much any time you dig, that's what you find.

@WassonWatch Never did play Red Baron, but I put a lot of time into Aces of the Pacific.

My brother and I loved this game, and spent untold hours playing it. We discovered it around the same time we discovered Red Baron frozen pizzas. I remember both fondly.

Before LLMs, there was the Hemingway app and the Flesch Reading Ease Score. Writing courses love to give blanket advice to cut your writing to the bone, shorten your sentences, and avoid “telling” at all cost. And the Flesch test is one of “standards” that often gets recommended to authors. The problem with using the Flesch Reading Ease Score, however, is that it was never meant for fiction. Rudolf Flesch developed it in the 40s primarily to evaluate nonfiction, particularly journalism and government documents. In those cases, it’s extremely important for writers to make functional, informational text that’s accessible to general readers. The formula works reasonably well for that purpose, but when applied to fiction, it penalizes stylistic choices that literary and historical authors make. Faulkner, McCarthy, Henry James have long, intricate sentences that would fail the Flesch test miserably. Except they aren’t readability failures. They are artistic choices by the author, and probably sharpened by the editor. It ignores narrative complexity entirely. Likewise, it can’t account for genre conventions. Romance, horror, and literary fiction all have different baseline rhythms that the formula treats as if they should be the same. It simply isn’t suited for fiction. Voice, pacing, and emotional resonance don’t fit in a formula, and those are the very heart of a novel.

@aelfred_D youtu.be/s2FXfFeRtJo

Rewatching Tenet & 1. I forgot how funny it is 2. Always fun to see who Nolan casts that’s supposed to be him. Pattinson here. Floppy blond hair, suits, British 3. There’s no way this is a unique insight but the opening is Nolan’s way of processing the Aurora shooting, right?

@DrBrian1975 @Kristin_Fiction Of course, when I said the algo was falling apart a couple of years ago, I got plenty of people assuring me that it still worked great.

@DrBrian1975 @Kristin_Fiction It was 60 to 90 the last time I put anything out, and it was getting worse. The algo is broken and the signal to noise ratio, as I said, is downright stupid.

As someone who was actually able to write for a living for a little while, before the sheer deluge of crap made it untenable (and that was before LLMs made it even worse) these kind of people irritate the hell out of me.

@RobertCruzeJr1 I would take that as a compliment, except that it implies I speak French.

@AmericanPraeto2 On the plus side, a "companion book" to a Peter Nealen novel would be an obscure book on the French-Indochina War published in the 1960s in French, never translated to English, and out of print since 1972. Runs at least $95 on eBay. So buy Pete's book instead 😃

Religion News Service claims ‘Islamophobia’ is ‘surging,’ but Muslims are fighting back with ‘joy’ If there were ever a belief system of any kind, anywhere on the planet, that is not joyful, it is Islam. The Ayatollah Khomeini, who dedicated his life to understanding Islam fully and properly and implementing it correctly, even explicitly denied that joy had anything to do with true Islam: “Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious.” And yet now we are supposed to believe that Eid was full of “joy,” and that Muslims are fighting with “joy” against the evil and joyless “Islamophobes.” This article whining about “Islamophobia,” meanwhile, does what all such articles do: it completely ignores the reasons why anyone is suspicious of Islam in the first place. There is nary a word here about Islam’s political, supremacist, expansionist and violent aspects. The impression Dilshad Ali gives is that Muslims are the victims of unwarranted and irrational prejudice, likely rooted in racism and hatred of a non-Christian religion. And RNS, which has been a reliable propaganda organ for the left for years, publishes it happily.

Preach

@AmericanPraeto2 In this case, yes Amazon created it. But any removal of gatekeepers would have resulted in the same culture. Once pumping out novels became a get-rich (or get-clout) scheme, the slop deluge was inevitable

@Kristin_Fiction Only so many times you can look at search results for your name, and see most of the first two rows being all somebody else's work, using your name as a keyword.

@Kristin_Fiction Which is why I'm equally annoyed by the "Hashtag Am Writing" crowd as I am at Amazon.