
OSanctaSimplicitas
3.4K posts

OSanctaSimplicitas
@SanctSimplicita
Heretic though it burns


JD Vance is considering not running for President in 2028 due to "family priorities" - WaPo



Donald Trump is now considering inviting Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko to the White House.

TRUMP: I WILL DEPLOY ICE AGENTS TO AIRPORTS ON MONDAY IF DEMOCRATS DON'T AGREE TO FUND DHS





⚡️This is coerced negotiation being run through public whiplash. That is the real signal. Nothing in that sequence is random. The line keeps changing because the pressure campaign is moving through stages in real time. “No ceasefire” tells Iran there will be no equal bargain. “Winding down” tells markets and allies there is an off ramp. “Peace talks” tests whether Tehran is actually ready to fold. “Open Hormuz in 48 hours or lose the grid” is the hammer when Washington decides the answer is still too slow. So what is happening behind the scenes? Three clocks are colliding at once. The military clock says Iran has been degraded enough that compellence might work now. The macro clock says the oil shock is too dangerous to let drag on. The diplomatic clock says if Iran is going to accept a smaller future, now is the moment to force the terms. Trump is speaking to all three clocks at once. That is why the messaging looks schizophrenic on the surface. Underneath, it is one coherent ladder. Pressure. probe. threaten. offer off ramp. threaten harder. Keep the settlement door open while making the cost of refusing it unbearable. This means Washington thinks Iran is weaker than it looks, but not yet broken enough to simply obey. That is why the public language keeps oscillating between exit and annihilation. They are trying to find the exact pressure point where Tehran decides reopening the artery and swallowing humiliation is less dangerous than taking another round of strategic punishment. The real objective has become brutally clear. Reopen Hormuz. Stop the oil shock. Lock in Iran’s downgrade. End the hottest phase only after America can say it forced the result. That also means there are probably competing factions inside the machine right now, but the competition is over timing, not direction. One faction wants to cash out soon and stabilize the system. Another wants one more hard squeeze because they think Iran is already on the edge. A third cares most about oil, inflation, and domestic blowback. Trump is arbitraging all three. He wants maximum leverage without owning an endless war. So what is the real read? The off ramp is real. The threats are real. The peace chatter creates the opening. The ultimatum is meant to force Iran into it. That is why the sequence looks crazy if you read each line literally as a standalone truth. It makes total sense if you read it as coercive bargaining under time pressure. The danger is obvious. Once you start threatening the civilian power grid of a 90 million person state, you are no longer just degrading military capability. You are threatening regime paralysis and societal breakdown. That can force compliance fast. It can also trigger the most desperate retaliation of the whole war. So the next phase is the narrowest bridge yet. Forced settlement on one side. Violent overshoot on the other. The deepest truth is this: Behind the scenes, they are trying to end the war by making the next refusal catastrophically expensive.

Spanish NATO troops in Iraq pull out and head home via Turkey. Europe is not in love with Trump to say it mildly


🔥🔥🔥🔥 A must read: President Trump reverts to old thinking and statements from his first presidency in 2019, downplaying the significance of oil in the Middle East and talks about shipping in Hormuz Strait. You can evaluate what I wrote in this column in World Oil Magazine in July 2019 in light of current events and Trump's statement below: Link: worldoil.com/magazine/2019/… Trump is wrong on the declining significance of the Strait of Hormuz. Speaking about the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, President Trump asserted recently that “We don’t even need to be there, in that the U.S. has just become the largest producer of energy anywhere in the world.” He also questioned the role of the U.S. in the region: The U.S., he said, is “protecting the shipping lanes for other countries” for “zero compensation.” Here is why he is wrong: 🔴Throughout history, superpowers have always tried to control trade routes and secure them. Protecting waterways is well-entrenched in U.S. foreign and defense policies. 🔴U.S. control of the flow of Middle Eastern oil means its control of Europe, Japan and China. Russia will be more than happy to take over such a position. 🔴Being the largest oil producer in the world does not shield the U.S. from a price shock resulting from instability in the Middle East in general, and from the vacuum caused by the absence of the U.S. from the region. 🔴The U.S. needs Middle Eastern oil because of crude quality issues: All the increase in U.S. shale production is light crude, super-light, and condensates, while several U.S. refineries need the heavier, more sour crudes. From a policymaking point of view, crude quality matters, probably more than quantity at this stage, especially after the loss of the Venezuelan heavy crude because of U.S. sanctions on that country. 🔴The cost of protecting the Strait of Hormuz should be compared to the potential losses, if the U.S. were to withdraw from the region, not to the current benefits. That is how U.S. military leaders viewed the role of the U.S. in the Middle East, in recent decades. 🔴Those countries in the Gulf region can crash the oil market for a long period and reduce U.S. oil production by more than 3 MMbpd, making the U.S. more dependent on the Middle East again. I will conclude with this statement: Who will be happy to see the U.S. either withdrawing from the Gulf region or reducing its presence? Here is a list: Iran, ISIS, AL Qaeda, Russia and China. I rest my case!



Trump on Strait of Hormuz: At a certain point, it will open itself



The reckless campaign against Iran will weaken America’s president. That will make him angry. Be warned: he makes a very bad loser econ.st/4lA7lEQ
















