Cú Chris (note to self: DO NOT TWEET)

@EvanWritesOnX Posting increasingly longer tweets trying to explain your genius insight when it's simply : rich elites are in control and you're all idiots being bothered by mass slaughter. I'm a good pious Muslim but I can also help you make money with the worst humans on the planet 😂😂😂

The posts you're seeing online, "Trump is an idiot," "strategic failure," is the most surface level thinking you can come across. These people evaluating the "war" are as though the sitting president is the principal actor pursuing coherent state objectives, and then grading him against those objectives. When the objectives appear contradictory, bombing a country while lifting sanctions on its oil, attacking Iran while enriching Russia; they conclude incompetence. But the contradiction only exists if you assume the US government is the client. It isn't. The Private Sector is the client. And from TPS's perspective, every single move is executing precisely as the structural incentives predict. There's right now, three TPS sectors that are directly feeding on this war simultaneously. This rarely happens. They usually take turns on rotation. The MIC via the Pentagon has requested $200 billion in supplemental war funding, on top of a baseline defense budget already exceeding $800 billion annually. Mostly taxpayers. Taxpayers who think this is a "strategic failure". Lockheed's stock alone has risen nearly 40% since the beginning of 2026 as tensions with Iran grew. The energy sector is the second beneficiary, and this is where the "sanctions contradiction" reveals itself as anything but contradictory. Before the war, the US had already become the world's largest LNG exporter. Now look at what the war did to the competitive landscape. Qatar halted LNG production after Iranian strikes on its facilities, removing the world's second-largest LNG supplier from the market. European natural gas prices nearly doubled, and European storage sat at a five-year low below 30%. Asian and European buyers are now scrambling for whatever LNG is available, and US terminals are already operating at full capacity. American LNG producers aren't shipping more volume; they're collecting massively higher prices on every cargo that leaves the Gulf Coast. These producers will be in for a windfall as desperate international buyers bid top dollar to secure what fuel is available. The structural consequence is permanent: Qatar's reputation as the world's most reliable LNG supplier is damaged. Gas importers are realizing they've perhaps taken Qatar's dependability for granted. Qatar knows this. It's baked into the agreement. Trade-off. When buyers restructure their long-term contracts after this crisis, they will diversify toward US supply, the only major LNG exporter not located in a warzone or subject to Strait of Hormuz risk. The war doesn't just produce short-term profits for US energy companies; it restructures the global LNG market's risk calculus permanently in Private Sector's favor. Now resolve the "sanctions contradiction." The surface-level critics see this sequence: the US starts a war, oil prices spike, and then the administration lifts sanctions on Russian oil and Iranian oil at sea to bring prices down. They call this incoherent. It's perfectly coherent. It's just serving a different client than the one critics assume. Trump said his administration would lift some sanctions on oil-producing countries to keep energy prices down, stating "We have sanctions on some countries. We're going to take those sanctions off until this straightens out." The Treasury issued a 30-day waiver on deliveries of Russian oil already loaded on tankers, and on Friday, Treasury lifted sanctions on 140 million barrels of Iranian oil at sea. What does this accomplish? It provides just enough price relief to prevent the oil shock from becoming politically fatal domestically, Brent crude at $112 is painful but manageable; $125 would trigger a recession and collapse Congressional support. The sanctions relief acts as a pressure valve to keep oil in the band where the managed conflict can continue. It doesn't end the price spike; it modulates it. Meanwhile, the underlying damage to Iranian and Qatari supply capacity continues to accumulate, ensuring that when the 'war' ends, the market will have permanently shifted toward private sector energy dominance. That's the play. That's the terms being negotiated while you're watching a "war" play out. The Russian sanctions relief is the most telling. The Kremlin's spokesman said US and Russian "interests coincide" regarding energy market stabilization. European leaders were outraged. Zelensky warned that revenue from the eased sanctions would fund Russia's war effort in Ukraine. But notice who was not upset: US energy producers. Russian oil entering the market at temporarily unsanctioned prices is competition, yes, but it's controlled competition, limited to 30-day waivers on oil already at sea. It calms markets without fundamentally altering long-term supply contracts. And it creates a diplomatic chit with Moscow that may prove useful in a future Ukraine settlement. The TPS doesn't care about Russian sanctions on principle, it cares about them instrumentally. When the instrument needs recalibrating, it recalibrates. The FIC angle is equally important. I mentioned this many times. Oil prices remain well above pre-war levels, with Brent crude settling around $112 per barrel, up from roughly $70 before the conflict began. That $40+ per barrel spread, applied across global crude markets, represents an enormous transfer of wealth. Commodity trading desks, insurance markets (warzone and marine insurance premiums have exploded), shipping firms navigating alternative routes, and financial institutions managing the volatility; all of these are extracting fees from the crisis. The FIC doesn't need a side in the war. It hedges either way, with enough volatility to generate trading profits but not so much that markets seize up entirely. The $105-115 Brent band is the sweet spot. The Strait of Hormuz is the key to the entire architecture. Every analyst quoted in mainstream media treats the closure as an unintended consequence. Something the administration "didn't see coming." But look at the incentive map. The Strait's closure is the mechanism by which all three TPS extraction channels, very rarely, activate simultaneously. Without the Strait closure, there's no oil price spike (no FIC windfall), no Qatari supply disruption (no US LNG market capture), and no compelling reason for a $200 billion defense supplemental (no MIC ratchet). Trump has now said the Strait of Hormuz should be "guarded and policed" by "other Nations who use it, the United States does not." The US doesn't need Hormuz oil, it's a net energy exporter. The countries that need Hormuz are in Europe and Asia. By forcing them to shoulder the military burden of reopening the strait, Washington compels its allies to increase their own defense spending (boosting MIC exports), deepen their dependence on US security guarantees, and accept US LNG as the safe alternative to Gulf supply. Six allied nations have already committed to "preparatory planning" for a Hormuz security coalition; exactly the outcome that makes NATO allies pay for their own protection, a stated Trump objective since 2017. The GCC understand all this. Iran understands all this. Russia and China understand all this. This is the trade-off for the US leaving the Middle East. This is the trade-off for the peace and stability ask. The states are willing to take a setback against the TPS if it means gaining more autonomy in the future. They play the long game. The TPS wants to get paid today. All three factions are collecting. While citizens who are effectively paying for it, call this a strategic failure. Open your eyes.

@SurreallyZarya I'm Mr Irony then because fuck AI for eternity

The reactionary anti-ai take from people that have been online since birth is the most ironic irony...

@tomdoorley Or he might go the way of Mandala and the ANC and time might be kinder to Adams that you want it to be Tom.

Oh, I think we understand. When the time comes for his obituary it will refer to "The IRA leader who always denied his rôle".

@ACTBrigitte Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence. You're welcome.

I stand with the United States. I stand with Israel. I do not stand with terrorists.

@Berlinnaeus Violent oppression begets violent resistance, Bernie. If you're only motivated to write letters about the latter and not the former methinks you're not thinking very deeply.

Irish Independent...

@WellsJorda89710 You worship money. Jesus would have ran you from the temples. Zionism is no different to the Afrikaners in South Africa. A supremacist ideology. Malcolm told us about you. You'd have called Mandela a terrorist. Have a pat on your good boy head.

Listen up, clowns: Calling someone a “Zionist” like it’s the new N-word? Pathetic. Zionism = Israel deserves to exist. That’s the ENTIRE definition. Not genocide. Not supremacy. Just a homeland for Jews after 2,000 years of exile and slaughter. I’m a Zionist. Black man right here. And I’m not hiding it. So when you scream “Zionists hate Black people,” you’re just yelling at ME. How’s that working out for you? 🔥🇮🇱 Drop your dumb takes below. I’ll wait. #ZionismIsNotHate #BlackZionist #IsraelForever #ExposeTheLies

@JBuckleyMLA Are ya raging lmaoooooo

Ah yes, nothing says “I was never in the IRA” quite like holding a Sinn Féin press conference while standing in front of a painting of an IRA member jailed for bombing- pure coincidence, obviously!

@lucky_strikes_x But humans also have souls.... An interesting contradiction I think.

“the notion that everyone could live in harmony is a really dangerous idea [and] will enslave you.”

@AmericanGwyn I find it quite interesting that he speaks of people having souls whilst simultaneously saying we're all primitive beasts unable to mature to a level of civility/,civilization that has moved beyond acts of violence.

Still thinking about this note I stumbled across in Cormac McCarthy’s private papers: “The notion that we are all as one is nonsense.” It echoes something he told the NYT in 1992: “the notion that everyone could live in harmony is a really dangerous idea [and] will enslave you.”

@ArsenalSensible @Carra23 Terry blocked me when I pointed out he does click baity headlines and thumbnails himself DAY AFTER DAY. I'm not supporting Carragher because even he does shit for viral views but the Idea Flewers is some beacon of light fighting for football fans is silly. He's a lizard.

@Carra23 Terry is right. You, Carragher, are a hypocrite. You praised Maresca for running onto the pitch after a late 2-1 win, you praised Klopp’s passion and celebration after running on the pitch, but criticized Odegaard for taking pics with a camera man.

No it’s not me, it’s partly because of your fan base online, something I didn’t mention in the piece! The column is actually quite positive about Arsenal/Arteta 🤷‍♂️😅 Sunday is the time to get the cameras out if you win, not after a PL win in January 🙃😂

@KarlThyer Hate to be that guy but I simply believe AI is unethical and should not be used at all regardless of how pure one's intentions. It scrapes and steals peoples' actual work and that's before we even discuss the sustainability issues and how's it's taking clean water from the public

Any feedback on your experience using the coachsideapp.co.uk will hugely be appreciated. I’m the sole owner and founder and fixing creating stuff as we go along. 🙌🏽

@_PeterRyan I think you're showing how low the bar is and how low the quality of people in public life has sank because nothing on the above tweet in particularly insightful nevermind astute. Things are so shit now that being competent apparently sets you apart. Bleak.

I am not deifying and its assertions like that box you into being unserious. My argument is that Carney is competent, can see realist cost / benefits, and as a middle power has the flexibility to decouple from the excesses of American led imperial order. Thus, he acts as an initial bridge to a future political reformation not an ideal version of what comes next. Which is also why my tweet was prefaced with “at least”.

At the very least, Ireland needs to dump these people and find its Carney because these two bit empty suits are not going to cut it in what’s coming

@_PeterRyan You're trying very hard to infer I'm some underread and underbred low life because I don't agree with you deifying Mark Carney. That's simultaneously amusing and a little grim.

@MeAgainCG I guarantee you have not read through any of his policy documents or budgets. You are making an assumption on seeing “bank of England” on his resume

@downeytrev A disgrace! No different than having a nice glass of wine in the evening young man! 😂

@MeAgainCG 😂😂 I’ve never really dabbled. Might fix that

Growing time again. Getting the beds ready for cabbage, broccoli, turnips, beetroot, cauliflower, onions, peas and strawberries. All my spuds will be in pots this year. Tomatoes, lettuce, pak choi, grapes in the tunnel. Blackberries, blueberries, pears, apples and nuts on trees.

@_PeterRyan I've read plenty about him. He talks out both sides of his mouth. He's a former head of the Bank of England, someone that's spent their entire life "inside the court" and you think we need one of those in Ireland 😂😂 methinks you're projecting

@MeAgainCG Not read anything past clickbait anti-carney tweets award 🥇

This is the first time this page has used “Palestinians killed” in a tweet. The first time.

@melissaeweiss You're not allowed bomb the bridges in the first place you fuckin' paycho

Israel: We are going to strike these bridges that cross the Litani River. This is a warning so that civilians and journalists do not go to this area when it is going to be hit. RT's Steve Sweeney: I will go there anyway. The internet: Wow Israel tried to kill a journalist!