#republican war hawks | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jbaileyfansite · 7 months

Text

Interview with The Telegraph (2023)

We all know what is meant by McCarthyism. It popularly refers to the first half of the 1950s, when Senator Joseph R McCarthy led a ruthless campaign to hound suspected communists out of the US government. What’s less well-remembered than the Red Menace is the Lavender Scare: by an executive order from President Eisenhower, McCarthyism also targeted gays and lesbians. “If you want to be against McCarthy, boys,” the senator once told the press, “you’ve got to be either a Communist or a c--ksucker.”

Thus gay men and women, living closeted lives as they worked for the state, were targeted by sinister-sounding bodies: the FBI’s Sex Deviance Investigations Unit, Washington DC police’s Sex Perversion Elimination Program and the Department of State’s M Unit. All sought to identify government employees deemed to be security risks vulnerable to blackmail.

Popular culture lost sight of the Lavender Scare until it was brought into the light in the US by Thomas Mallon’s 2007 novel Fellow Travelers. Set mostly in the early 1950s, it told of a tangled romance between two men; Hawkins “Hawk” Fuller, a handsome war veteran and political fixer who steers clear of emotional attachment until he meets Tim Laughlin, a sweet young Catholic newcomer to DC whom he nicknames Skippy and sets up in the office of a Republican senator.

The novel was not published in the UK. But now it has been adapted for television, and one piece of casting in particular feels calculated to get the attention of audiences beyond the US: Laughlin is played by British actor Jonathan Bailey, best known as the Regency heartthrob Anthony, 9th Viscount Bridgerton.

His co-star is the American Matt Bomer, who, like Bailey, professes ignorance of what the New York Times, in its review of the novel, referred to as “the Lavender Hill mob”. “It’s a chapter of LGBTQIA history that I was completely unaware of,” he says.

This is not the first time the novel has been adapted – it was staged as an opera in Cincinnati in 2016. By then it had already caught the attention of Ron Nyswaner, who laboured over bringing the book to the screen for the best part of a decade. Best known for his script for Philadelphia, the 1993 Aids courtroom drama which earned Tom Hanks his first Oscar, it was his stint as a producer of Homeland that persuaded Showtime to fund an expensive eight-part decades-spanning drama. “I’m still in disbelief that we were able to tell this story on the scale that we were able to tell it,” says Bomer, who is also an executive producer on the drama.

The scale is considerable. The period detail of 1950s Washington, in both corridors of power and gay demimonde, is lavishly recreated. And as the story progresses it parts company with the novel, which opens with Hawk looking back at the closure of his career as a diplomat in Tallinn in 1991. Nyswaner’s script expands to take in other pivots in modern US history: the Civil Rights movement, the Vietnam War, and the spread of Aids in the 1980s, when the now-married Hawk and the dying Laughlin meet for a final reckoning.

I met the drama’s two stars in London earlier in the summer, before the actors’ strike in Hollywood put a stop to such encounters. It was the first time they’d seen each other since the end of the shoot. Bomer, though just off the plane and heavily jet-lagged, exudes a chiselled, blue-eyed intensity. Bailey fizzes with puppyish energy. Both are themselves gay and Bailey in particular sees their casting as a sign of progress. “We would not be playing these parts five or 10 years ago,” he says. The highlights of his CV are mix and match. He has played mainly straight characters on television in the likes of Broadchurch, Crashing and W1A, and gay characters on stage in the Sondheim musical Company and Mike Bartlett’s play C--k in the West End.

The career of Bomer, 10 years his senior, looks a little more linear. His most high-profile film role is as an object of ladies’ lust in male-strippers drama Magic Mike and its sequel. But in 2014 he won a Golden Globe playing a closeted journalist in HBO’s adaptation of Larry Kramer’s play The Normal Heart. In 2018, he made his Broadway debut as part of an exclusively gay cast reviving The Boys in the Band, a portrait of gay life in 1960s New York.

Earlier on the day we met, Stanley Tucci had said on Desert Island Discs that he doesn’t see why straight actors shouldn’t play gay characters. “I think it’s incredibly complicated and nuanced,” says Bailey with a sigh. “You just want to make sure that everyone feels there’s enough space at the table. Everyone who is panicking that they’re never going to be able to play outside their own experience is wasting their energy.”

Bomer counters that it ought to cut both ways, that gay actors should be allowed to play straight. He speaks darkly of movie producers who “wouldn’t hire me because of who I was”, of gay actors who “weren’t even given a shot. A lot of it boils down to opportunity. Was everyone given the opportunity for the role? There is something about seeing the most authentic version of who you are represented on screen. It gives you hope.”

In Fellow Travelers that authenticity is portrayed most unswervingly in the bedroom, which the plot requires Hawk and Laughlin to visit often. “I haven’t necessarily really seen gay intimacy in a way that I would want to,” says Bailey. I gently remind him of Linus Roache, who plays a senator in Fellow Travelers but, back in 1994, starred in Jimmy McGovern’s Priest as a Catholic priest struggling with his sexuality – graphically so in a central scene with Robert Carlyle. “Oh yeah, that’s true,” he says. “I looked to that a lot.”

As is on trend for male actors nowadays, both leads look impeccable with their shirts off in low honeyed lighting. “Hawk is ex-military and he also wants to appeal to people in bathroom stalls,” reasons Bomer, who did period-appropriate Royal Canadian Air Force drills and looks no less pneumatic than he did in Magic Mike.

Bailey concedes that Laughlin, who orders milk the first time we meet him, boasts the body of a Greek god for the simple reason that the shoot overlapped with Bridgerton (yes, he confirms, the newly married Anthony is back for the third season). “There’s no way Tim would have had a Bridgerton body, but what can you do if you’re commuting? I was like, I really want to lose weight to tell Tim’s story, but I lost fat and just got really ripped.”

How resonant is the history portrayed in Fellow Travelers to today? It’s easy to play six degrees of separation between now and then. For instance, McCarthy’s closeted sidekick Roy Cohn is a lead character (played here by Will Brill). A ferocious prosecutor of both communists and gays, he would go on to be Donald Trump’s lawyer, before dying of complications from Aids. It was Trump’s three appointees to the Supreme Court who this summer enabled a 6-3 ruling releasing businesses and organisations from the obligation to treat same-sex couples equally. The landmark ruling occurred just days before I met the actors, and has been widely interpreted as a profound attack on LGBT rights.

“There is an entire generation of men and women who suffered and struggled and loved under a government that felt that its morals were more important than their personal freedoms,” says Bomer. “And that’s exactly what we see happening today. Whether it’s McCarthy or the current Supreme Court justices, are morals more important than freedoms?”

Source

#fellow travelers #jonathan bailey #matt bomer #the telegraph interview #interviews:2023 #jonny bailey #interviews #NEW!

110 notes · View notes

lieutenant-teach · 2 months

Text

Wandering around the galaxy, ex-Commander Cody and little Din Djarin meet an unexpected adversary, and Cody learns about a new burden he acquired unknowingly. 2/3 part (1 part), (part 3).

Cody enjoyed the planet Trask - being away from the Core Worlds, it remained unscathed by the Clone Wars; being small, not densely populated and lacking valuable resources, it wasn’t occupied by the Empire that aimed at most important and valuable planets and systems. No matter how much Cody disliked the Outer Rim for its mostly criminal population and their shady occupations, now he was glad to catch some breath in there.

Especially while he had a kid on his hands.

Din turned out to be a not very problematic child, though quite different from the cadets on Kamino. Not physically trained, which is a huge minus when you’re on the run. But, like a cadet, he didn’t complain about lack of comfort and stability in such life, though Cody tried his best to provide him with food better than rations. Regrettably, it required more sallies on the surfaces of various planets, thus it was more dangerous for both of them. Cody shuddered from a mere thought what the Empire would do if they were caught.

Apart from physical comfort, Cody attempted to give at least a little bit of emotional comfort to the kid. At times Din woke up crying, and Cody held him until the boy fell asleep again, exhausting himself from tears. At these moments Cody felt like breaking apart a bit every time, pressing Din to the chest, listening to his occasional whimpering in his sleep. The kid deserved a normal life, not all of this disaster happening to the Galaxy.

He felt both proud at a little brave cadet and bitter at a child forced to grow up too quickly when Din asked to teach him shooting.

They’d spent several days in the town in some kind of a ratty tavern, avoiding unnecessary questions and suspicions, as they easily passed for a father and a son due to similar complexion and hair and eye colour. Cody worried that he would be recognized for his distinct face, but not yet – the locals had never acquainted a Jango Fett clone before, and all the Republican propaganda portrayed troopers only in full armour, a very clever way to erase personalities. Though he continued to pull down the hood when walking the streets – just in case.

When one day they met someone from Cody’s past. Or, more precisely, from Kenobi’s past.

Cody felt someone was watching them. So did Din – the boy was glancing around nervously and squeezing Cody’s hand tighter. Cody lowered another hand near the blaster; if the follower was daring enough, they’d shoot right in the centre of the market brimming with unsuspecting citizens. And then he recognized a face in the crowd, watching him like a hawk. He raised an eyebrow, the person nodded to the street corner nearby, inviting for a talk.

– Where did you take the kid? – she attacked him with a low voice as soon as they turned the angle. Din hid behind Cody at the harshness.

– Hello there, Duchess Kryze, - Cody answered curtly. – I deserted.

– And still wearing their armour? – her hand was hovering over her own blaster, her posture tense as a nexu ready to strike.

– Better something than nothing, - he shrugged. – Why are you here? – He thought with regret that they’d have to leave the planet – if he met Bo-Katan Kryze, an heiress of Mandalore, who knows who else might hang around there.

– Why should I believe you? – she gripped her blaster, ignoring his query. – Who’s to say you don’t want to… - her eyes widened, she even took a step back. – How did you get it?!

– What? – Cody was taken aback, then he moved his free hand that wasn’t covering Din to the hilt of a saber on his belt.

– The Darksaber. How did you get it? – she hissed, her face twisting with anger.

Losing the blaster while fighting off the pirates intending to ransack your ship and sell the kid you take care of into slavery wasn’t fortunate. There were just too many for one man, as tough as Cody was – if not for Din’s shout ‘Cody! There!’ and him throwing something he dug seconds before from the mud. First Cody thought it was some dagger, but when the air hissed and enlightened with a brilliant black blade shining white on the razor-sharp edges and producing threatening buzz – he realized it was something different. Lucky him, he still remembered several lightsaber-wielding lessons General Kenobi gave him back during the war.

The saber was heavier than the General’s, almost non-cooperative, his first swings were clumsy and messy. But Cody knew he had to protect the kid, and with each movement the blade became lighter and lighter.

Still, Cody preferred non-Jedi weapons. So after fighting he disengaged it and clipped to a familiar spot on his belt – again, just in case of an attack. There weren’t many helpful blades conveniently lying around and waiting to be picked up during a skirmish, after all.

– Found it, - he shrugged again, playing nonchalant, mentally working out the ways of retreating.

Bo-Katan squeezed the fists, she was burning with barely controlled rage, though Cody couldn’t understand the reason. He remembered vaguely it was some Mandalorian weapon of historical significance – maybe, that was why she was so unhappy? She wanted a part of her culture back.

– You have no claim to this sword! – Bo-Katan raised her voice, then caught herself at a possibility of attracting unwanted attention of the passers-by and continued a bit softer: - This is a Mandalorian weapon, not designed for such like you! You have no right to wield it!

– I don’t have any ‘claim’, and you’re scaring the kid, - Cody intoned his ‘commander’ voice that some especially impressionable troopers called ‘regal’. Din mumbled ‘I’m not scared’ from behind his back and stepped a bit forward as if ready to confront Bo-Katan by himself. She threw a dirty look at the boy and turned her attention to Cody again, looking at him with thinned lips and narrowed eyes.

– According to an old Mandalorian tradition, whoever wields the Darksaber has the claim to the Mandalorian throne. But only in case of an honest fight.

– Duchess, I never intended to get involved in Mandalorian politics, - Cody felt an unpleasant feeling that despite his wishes he was getting tangled into something quite unsavory. – You can take the saber and overthrow your Governor Saxon or whatever, I’m not a part of it. – He knew this woman wasn’t sharing the peaceful policy of her sister, but frankly (and quite meanly) Cody didn’t give a flying kark about Mandalore. He knew these people had always had civil wars now and then ignited by their biggest ruling clans, and it couldn’t be worse than the Imperial occupation now. He even felt pity for Mandalorian citizens if all they wanted was to live in peace. Although, New Mandalorians were a very fresh change as per info he read, but the peace historically never lasted long on Mandalore.

But also there was one thing that turned almost all the clone troopers off while mentioning Mandalorians.

– I cannot just ‘take it’, - Bo-Katan spat and raised her chin proudly. – A true Mand’Alor must win it in a battle. Fairly speaking, I even feel insulted challenging such a disgrace to a Mandalorian. Dar’manda.

– Disgrace? – For one small second Cody’s stomach fell of rising fury born out of utter hypocrisy of this woman who had her opinions shared by all her compatriots. He didn’t even notice Din flinching as his voice dropped so low it was freezing cold as Hoth. – Did I ask to be created like this? Did any of us have any say in it? You dare to call me ‘soulless’ – where were you? – He stepped forward almost menacingly. – Where were you all, when millions of Mandalorian clones were being created and used in a war and discarded when ‘defective’, used as chipped puppets to kill the Jedi, who actually cared about us? So noble, so proud, so honorable Mandalorians – did you care about us? We, born Mandalorian, were never ever considered by all of you even as sentients, much less a part of you. We protected you – and you call me ‘disgrace’? Just because we were unfortunate enough to have some Mandalorian as our donor?

Bo-Katan clearly never expected such harshness and such words, moreover, it never ever crossed her mind – she even backed a bit, looking at Cody with surprise.

– You say this sword makes me your king? – Cody grabbed it from his belt and squeezed in his hand. – Who would even want to be your king? A people, who cannot live peacefully even on their own planet! Tearing themselves apart time and time again because of what – difference in traditions? At least we had a community – we, ‘disgraces’, as you love to call us.

Bo-Katan blinked, as if really seeing Cody for the first time. Cody exhaled sharply, only now realizing he was shaking with helpless rage – of unfairness, of disgust, of all this pain never noticed by the Republic. He steadied himself, composing his expression again. Glanced at Din, who was looking at him with a weird mixture of compassion, fear and determination.

– Take the sword, Lady Kryze, - Cody held out the hilt. – I reclaim my responsibilities that I obtained unknowingly.

– I cannot, - she didn’t hold out her own hand. – Challenge is obligatory.

– Then let the Empire and its minions continue ruining your people. Whatever, Duchess, - he threw the Darksaber into the mud to her feet. – I’ve said my piece.

#star wars #din djarin #commander cody #fanfiction #my fic #fanfic #cody and din #bo katan kryze #mandalorian culture #mandalorians critical #anti mandoclones #clones #clone troopers

20 notes · View notes

shinobicyrus · 4 months

Text

Brewing a cup of tea alone in my kitchen and started thinking about how when I was in high school the President of the United States of America started a disinformation campaign to start a pointless war in Iraq and how he's still able walk around a free man.

Over half a million Iraqi civilians. Thirty-five thousand American soldiers dead or wounded. A vivid memory of Colin Powell sitting in the UN holding a fake vial of anthrax, talking about mobile laboratories for producing bio-weapons Iraq didn't never had. Two-point-four trillion dollars and not a single politician, Democrat or "But how will be pay for it?" Republican Budget Hawk threatening to filibuster, or shut the government down over the expense.

It's not even a contentious political stance. It's not a fact that is regarded as controversial, or even argued by Republicans that the justifications for the invasion weren't a completely manufactured lie. And yet, and yet. No one in government lost their jobs, the senators of either party that voted for the war time and time again won re-election.

For some reason my two strongest memories of that time was sitting on the couch with my dog on a Sunday morning while a man on TV said "Ladies and Gentlemen, we got him" and when one of my classmates walked around school with a t-shirt she made herself, after some Blackwater mercenaries (called "civilian contractors" in the news, as if they put up drywall for a living) got ambushed and killed by some insurgents, which she painted to say: "Bomb Fallujah."

I drink my tea and feel old and very tired.

#Iraq War #American Imperialism #Politics #Hypocrisy #History #George W. Bush

10 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 8 months

Text

Foreign policy is likely to feature prominently at the Republican presidential primary debates. At the debate in August, a question on whether the candidates would support continued U.S. assistance to Ukraine produced a firestorm. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who had previously suggested that Russia’s war in Ukraine was not a “vital” national interest, appeared skeptical, calling on Europe to do more instead. Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy was more direct in opposing such aid, calling it “disastrous” for the United States to be “protecting against an invasion across somebody else’s border.” Former Vice President Mike Pence and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, on the other hand, expressed strong support for assisting Ukraine, effectively standing behind President Joe Biden’s efforts to counter Russian aggression while imploring the United States to do even more.

On the other side of the aisle, some Democrats have been wary of Biden’s policy on Ukraine, as evidenced by a letter (that was later retracted) sent to the president by progressive Democrats, calling for a diplomatic end to the conflict and potential sanctions relief for Russia.

In today’s polarized political atmosphere, such cross-cutting views may appear confounding. On most domestic policy issues, whether political leaders have an R or a D next to their name is often a pretty good guide to their take on any particular issue. But when it comes to foreign policy, the normal rules of politics do not apply. Instead, of much greater relevance is where a political leader falls on the foreign-policy ideology spectrum.

The schools of thought that make up this spectrum, reflecting fundamentally different views about the U.S. role in the world, are highly influential but not very well understood.

In seeking to differentiate between foreign-policy positions, the media often resorts to cliches, such as “hawks versus doves,” or buzzwords, such as “isolationist” and “neoconservative.” However, these terms tend to be oversimplified or exaggerated and convey little useful information. International relations theories are not all that helpful either. “Realism” is routinely conflated with an academic concept that predicts how nations can be expected to behave, rather than how they should. And other theories, such as “idealism” and “constructivism,” offer limited utility in understanding real-world decision-making.

Yet there are critical differences in how policymakers view the world and are seeking to influence the direction of U.S. foreign policy. There is a clear dichotomy, for instance, between those who believe that U.S. influence is mostly positive and that the United States should play an active role in global affairs and those who believe that U.S. hubris more often leads to bad outcomes and want to scale back the country’s overseas commitments.

There is a significant divide between those who believe that the United States should prioritize efforts to advance democratic values and norms and those who believe in defending more narrow strategic interests. And there are disparate views on whether the United States should stand firm against adversaries, such as Russia and China, or should seek to find common ground.

I have delineated six distinct foreign-policy camps that represent the dominant strains of thinking on the U.S. role in the world. These camps can be placed along a spectrum of international engagement. Four of them fall on the more assertive side of this spectrum, constituting “internationalists,” who believe that the United States should exercise its influence and be actively engaged in global affairs. And two of the camps are “non-internationalists,” who believe that the United States should scale back its global commitments and adopt a less forward-leaning foreign policy.

1. Unilateral Internationalists

Defining worldview: Unilateral internationalists believe U.S. primacy and freedom of action are paramount and prioritize unilateral U.S. action, unconstrained by alliances or international agreements, to advance strategic interests. While President George W. Bush came close, especially during his first term, no U.S. president has directly embraced this school.

Key attributes:

View China and Russia as the greatest challenges to U.S. primacy in the international system and seek to exert maximum pressure to counter U.S. adversaries and project American power

Prioritize U.S. national interests, even if at the expense of allies, and favor strategic interests over democratic values or a “rules-based order”—but support U.S. alliances while skeptical of allies’ willingness to act

Are distrustful of the United Nations and international agreements and favor U.S. withdrawal from international institutions where necessary to avoid restraints on U.S. power and sovereignty

Support using military force to advance U.S. interests

Prominent voices: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton

Recent U.S. presidents: None

Republican candidates: None

s the second most assertive of six camps.

2. Democratic Internationalists

Defining worldview: Democratic internationalists believe that defending democracy is essential to maintaining U.S. and global security and prioritize working with like-minded allies to advance shared values and a rules-based democratic order. This school has been predominant among elected U.S. leaders—across both political parties—since President Harry Truman declared it was the policy of the United States to help “free and independent nations to maintain their freedom.”

Key attributes:

View strategic competition between democracy and autocracy as the major fault line in the international system and support proactive measures to defend against revisionist autocracies, namely China and Russia

Are strong proponents of democratic alliances and solidarity and are eager to maintain the United States’ role as the “leader of the free world”

Support robust efforts to advance democratic values and human rights and to hold autocratic regimes to account for war crimes and violent oppression

Are willing to consider use of force if necessary to defend democracy and the rules-based order

Prominent voices: Madeleine Albright, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Chris Coons, G. John Ikenberry, Hal Brands

Recent U.S. presidents: Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Joe Biden

Republican candidates: Chris Christie, Nikki Haley, Mike Pence

ost assertive of six camps.

3. Realist Internationalists

Defining worldview: Realist internationalists believe that U.S. power should be utilized to defend more narrow strategic interests and prioritize pragmatic engagement with all nations to help preserve global and regional stability. Former National Security Advisors Brent Scowcroft and Henry Kissinger were quintessential practitioners of this school, which was also embraced by the presidents they served.

Key attributes:

View great-power rivalry as inevitable in the global system and support U.S. alliances and active efforts to deter rival powers and maintain global order

Are willing to engage adversaries and work with all nations, regardless of regime type, to advance strategic objectives

Are prepared to make mutual accommodations with rivals, or seek to divide them, to achieve a stable balance of power

Are inclined to “accept the world as it is” and are wary of U.S. intervention and democracy promotion efforts

Support a strong U.S. defense posture and are willing to use force when required to defend vital national interests

Prominent voices: Henry Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft, Robert Gates, Richard Haass, Stephen Krasner, Charles Kupchan

Recent U.S. presidents: Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush

Republican candidates: Ron DeSantis

4. Multilateral Internationalists

Defining worldview: Multilateral internationalists believe that peaceful coexistence with other nations should be a key objective and prioritize working through the U.N. and other multilateral institutions to solve global challenges and uphold international norms. President Barack Obama’s foreign policy was steeped in this school, now represented by former Secretary of State John Kerry, who is currently serving as the United States’ chief climate negotiator.

Key attributes:

Are wary of great-power rivalry and strategic competition and are eager to “extend a hand” and find areas of common ground with adversaries

Support active U.S. engagement to advance global norms, good governance, and human rights

Seek to cooperate with all nations to address transnational challenges, with a particular priority on climate change

Prefer to engage through inclusive institutions but support working with U.S. alliances to foster a rules-based order

Are disinclined to use military force and will consider it only when authorized by the U.N. Security Council

Prominent voices: John Kerry, Bruce Jones

Recent U.S. presidents: Barack Obama

Republican candidates: None

Non-Internationalists

1. Retractors

Defining worldview: Retractors believe that the world is taking advantage of the United States and support a more transactional foreign policy that seeks to retract the United States from global commitments and maximize pecuniary benefits. President Donald Trump’s foreign policy epitomizes this school. But its adherents date back to Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan in the late 1990s and the America First movement of the 1930s that sought to keep the United States out of World War II.

Key attributes:

Are deeply cynical about values and norms and seek and are prone to conspiracy theories and suspect the role of the “deep state” in manipulating U.S. policy

Are critical of alliances and disdainful of U.S. allies, particularly in Europe, and believe efforts to cooperate through international institutions are naive and self-defeating

Seek to “make deals” with autocratic regimes and are dismissive of democratic values and international norms

Emphasize economic protectionism and closed borders to prevent others from “ripping America off”

Believe the United States is militarily overcommitted but support occasional limited military actions to “act tough” and demonstrate U.S. prowess

Prominent voices: Michael Anton

Recent U.S. presidents: Donald Trump

Republican candidates: Donald Trump, Vivek Ramaswamy

2. Restrainers

Defining worldview: Restrainers believe that the United States is overstretched and overcommitted and support a more restrained foreign policy that significantly reduces the country’s global footprint. While still largely on the margins, this school has gained some prominence in recent years, as reflected by the emergence of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and its adherents.

Key attributes:

Are distrustful of U.S. power and influence in the international system and believe that the United States has no standing to promote democratic values or a rules-based order, given its own flawed democracy, hypocrisy, and imperialism

Believe the United States has picked unnecessary fights with adversaries and that its overseas military posture, alliances, and sanctions policies are often overly provocative

Are wary of “inflating” threats posed by China and Russia and favor diplomatic efforts to cooperate with adversaries and reach a mutual accommodation and view a nationalistic foreign policy as arrogant and distasteful

Seek to reduce the U.S. military presence overseas and to scale back commitments to NATO and other alliances and vigorously oppose the use of force

Prominent voices: Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders, Andrew Bacevich, Stephen M. Walt, Stephen Wertheim

Recent U.S. presidents: None

Republican candidates: None

Several key points follow from this analysis. First, admittedly, the edges of these camps are fuzzy, and policymakers may often find themselves straddling one or more of these camps, especially on specific issues. Nevertheless, these six schools are sufficiently discrete and represent the primary worldviews that are influencing the contemporary debate on how the United States should conduct its foreign policy.

Second, many of these schools tend to cross partisan lines. Democratic internationalism, for example, has been enthusiastically embraced by political leaders on both sides of the aisle and has strong bipartisan constituencies, as reflected in pro-democracy institutions such as the International Republican Institute and National Democratic Institute. Realism has also had a long tradition in U.S. foreign policy, resonating with national security practitioners across both parties. Similarly, the restraint school draws support among both progressives on the left and libertarians looking for Washington to scale back its global commitments. On the other hand, unilateral internationalism has found a home mainly among conservatives, while multilateral internationalism draws support mostly from liberals. In recent years, retraction has become the policy of choice among pro-Trump Republicans.

Third, determining where recent U.S. presidents fall on this spectrum is not axiomatic. While they may be inclined toward a particular camp as they enter office, most presidents are not purists, and as they govern, many find themselves running up against practical and political realities that make it difficult to maintain a consistent and predictable foreign-policy governing philosophy.

Barack Obama, for example, seemed drawn toward realist internationalism, pursuing a “reset” in relations with Russia and later declining to commit U.S. force to hold Syrian President Bashar al-Assad accountable for his use of chemical weapons. But given the priority Obama placed on engaging adversaries such as Cuba and Iran and working through the United Nations, the main thrust of his foreign policy appeared more consistent with multilateral internationalism.

George W. Bush also straddled various camps. In launching the global war on terrorism, Bush seemed determined to assert U.S. primacy and appeared to be leaning toward unilateral internationalism. But with his emphasis on democracy promotion in Iraq and Afghanistan, his signature Freedom Agenda, and his call for “ending tyranny in our world” in his second inaugural address, Bush’s overall worldview appeared to be more grounded in democratic internationalism.

Where Biden falls is still up for debate. Currently, the Biden national security team is split between realists, who pressed for Biden to withdraw from Afghanistan and reengage with Saudi Crown Prince Muhammed bin Sultan, and democratic internationalists, who championed the president’s initiative to organize a Summit for Democracy. However, given Biden’s steadfast commitment to work with NATO to defend a democratic Ukraine and his conviction that the world is facing a “global struggle between democracy and autocracy,” the broad arc of the Biden administration’s foreign policy so far seems to be more consistent with democratic internationalism—though a more definitive judgment will have to wait until his presidency concludes.

So where does this leave the current slate of Republican candidates? Pence and Haley, as well as former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, all of whom have called for standing up against Russian aggression and have denounced China’s human rights violations, are squarely in the democratic internationalist camp. Donald Trump, of course, has his own lane. DeSantis and Ramaswamy, on the other hand, appear caught between realism and Trumpian retraction, as they battle for support among the Republican rank and file who are skeptical of U.S. global engagement. DeSantis favors a pivot away from Ukraine and toward China—a very realist way to think about trade-offs. Ramaswamy, who has called for a strategy to split Russia and China, also sounds like a realist at times, but his stance on extricating the United States from any involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war, potentially ceding Taiwan to China, and putting the “interests of America first” seems to suggest he is veering toward retraction.

While voters may not consider foreign policy to be central to their vote for the next president, how U.S. leaders choose to engage in the world is critical to the security and prosperity of the American people. By gaining a clearer understanding of the most influential foreign-policy schools of thought, voters—and indeed the candidates themselves—will be in a better position to make informed choices.

33 notes · View notes

usafphantom2 · 6 months

Text

Ukraine is now calling for THAAD air defense system, F-18 fighters, MQ-9 drones and helicopters

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 12/07/2023 - 17:40in Military, War Zones

The latest list of U.S. weapons that Ukraine says it needs to fight the Russian military includes sophisticated air defense systems, F-18 "Hornet" fighters, drones, Apache and Blackhawk helicopters, according to documents seen by Reuters.

Officials from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense presented a “arms list to meet the needs of Ukraine's defense forces” during a closed-door session of a conference in Washington on Wednesday, with the presence of government officials and defense industry executives.

The comprehensive list included weapons that Ukraine already has in stock, such as Abrams tanks and 155-millimeter artillery, as well as some weaponry, as well as F-16 fighters, drones and long-range ATACMS missiles that it has requested in the past.

But the list has some surprises, including expensive items such as C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft manufactured by Boeing and the C-130 Super Hercules manufactured by Lockheed Martin. Boeing's Apache attack helicopters entered the list, as did the Black Hawk helicopter manufactured by Lockheed Martin's Sikorsky unit.

THAAD system being disembarked from a C-17.

But the Ukrainians didn't stop there. The documents show that Ukraine is also looking for F-18 Hornet fighters, three types of drones manufactured by General Atomics, including the MQ-9B Sky Guardian and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) air defense system manufactured by Lockheed.

Ukrainians know that they must guarantee Western military aid to continue the fight.

Legislation that would provide billions of dollars in new security assistance for Ukraine and Israel was blocked in the U.S. Senate on Wednesday, as Republicans pressed their demands for tougher measures to control immigration on the U.S.-Mexico border.

U.S. President Joe Biden made the Ukrainian victory a foreign policy goal while campaigning for re-election in November 2024.

Ukraine's list reflects what would easily be equivalent to billions of dollars in arms purchases or donations.

Source: Reuters

Tags: Military AviationF/A-18 HornetWar Zones - Russia/Ukraine

Sharing

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has work published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. Uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

MILITARY

Italian Air Force flies with new GA-ASI MQ-9A Reaper Block 5

12/07/2023 - 2:00 PM

HELICOPTERS

Boeing targets more exports of Chinook helicopters to South Korea

12/07/2023 - 1:00 PM

SAAB

EXPODEFENSA: Saab presents full-scale model of Gripen seeking to win competition in Colombia

12/07/2023 - 07:51

AERONAUTICAL ACCIDENTS

Bell 412 helicopter from Guyana disappears in area claimed by Venezuela

07/12/2023 - 00:05

MILITARY

Argentina does not pay and Norway delays delivery of Orions aircraft

06/12/2023 - 23:55

MILITARY

U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marines order suspension of flights with V-22 Osprey after fatal accident

06/12/2023 - 23:41

12 notes · View notes

ridenwithbiden · 3 months

Text

Dead #PresidentsDay Abraham Lincoln #BlackHistoryMonth #AbrahamLincoln became the #UnitedStates’ 16th President in 1861, issuing the #EmancipationProclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy in 1863.

Lincoln warned the South in his Inaugural Address: “In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you…. You have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to preserve, protect and defend it.”

Lincoln thought secession illegal, and was willing to use force to defend Federal law and the Union. When Confederate batteries fired on Fort Sumter and forced its surrender, he called on the states for 75,000 volunteers. Four more slave states joined the Confederacy but four remained within the Union. The Civil War had begun.

The son of a Kentucky frontiersman, Lincoln had to struggle for a living and for learning. Five months before receiving his party’s nomination for President, he sketched his life:

“I was born Feb. 12, 1809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. My parents were both born in Virginia, of undistinguished families–second families, perhaps I should say. My mother, who died in my tenth year, was of a family of the name of Hanks…. My father … removed from Kentucky to … Indiana, in my eighth year…. It was a wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods. There I grew up…. Of course when I came of age I did not know much. Still somehow, I could read, write, and cipher … but that was all.”

Lincoln made extraordinary efforts to attain knowledge while working on a farm, splitting rails for fences, and keeping store at New Salem, Illinois. He was a captain in the Black Hawk War, spent eight years in the Illinois legislature, and rode the circuit of courts for many years. His law partner said of him, “His ambition was a little engine that knew no rest.”

He married Mary Todd, and they had four boys, only one of whom lived to maturity. In 1858 Lincoln ran against Stephen A. Douglas for Senator. He lost the election, but in debating with Douglas he gained a national reputation that won him the Republican nomination for President in 1860.

As President, he built the Republican Party into a strong national organization. Further, he rallied most of the northern Democrats to the Union cause. On January 1, 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy.

Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: “that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain–that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom–and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Lincoln won re-election in 1864, as Union military triumphs heralded an end to the war. In his planning for peace, the President was flexible and generous, encouraging Southerners to lay down their arms and join speedily in reunion.

The spirit that guided him was clearly that of his Second Inaugural Address, now inscribed on one wall of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D. C.: “With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds…. ”

On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated at Ford’s Theatre in Washington by John Wilkes Booth, an actor, who somehow thought he was helping the South. The opposite was the result, for with Lincoln’s death, the possibility of peace with magnanimity died.

10 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 2 years

Text

If Republicans take control of the House this fall, they plan on using debt limit talks — and the possibility of throwing the U.S. into default — if they don’t get their way on slashing government programs.

According to a new interview with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California), the party is planning on using must-pass debt ceiling legislation to force through the GOP’s agenda.

“You can’t just continue down the path to keep spending and adding to the debt,” McCarthy said in an interview with Punchbowl News, ignoring the fact that economists view national debt obligations as often signaling the health of the economy. “We’re not just going to keep lifting your credit card limit, right,” he continued. “And we should seriously sit together and [figure out] where can we eliminate some waste? Where can we make the economy grow stronger?”

When McCarthy refers to eliminating so-called waste, it is likely that he is referring to, among other things, the GOP’s plans to cut Medicare and Social Security, two of the most popular and vital anti-poverty government programs in the U.S.

Republicans have been attacking the programs over the past months. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) has threatened to put budgets up to congressional debate every year, which would almost definitely lead to cuts. Alarmingly, earlier this year, the Republican Study Committee, the largest Republican caucus in the House, put out a plan to raise the age at which people receive full benefits from both programs to 70, while implementing a rule that would raise the eligibility age over time.

The debt ceiling is an effective bludgeon for Republicans to use for this purpose. The debt ceiling accounts for government funding to provide promised payments for programs like Medicare and Social Security, as well as military salaries and other “existing legal obligations,” according to the Treasury Department.

Republicans had threatened to put the U.S. in default last September, after former President Donald Trump urged the party to do so. They appeared to be posing as deficit hawks — something they only do when a Democrat is in charge — while Democrats were debating the Build Back Better Act.

If they pull a similar move in 2023, it could be similar to 2011, when the GOP manufactured a debt ceiling crisis that ultimately “led directly to the worst recovery following a recession since World War II,” according to the Economic Policy Institute.

If the debt ceiling isn’t raised by fall of 2023, when the government is slated to run out of funding, the U.S. could find itself in a situation similar to last year, when it was at risk of defaulting on its loans. This could have triggered a global recession and would have disastrous short- and long-term consequences for the U.S., as the creditworthiness of the country would be ruined.

In other words, Republicans appear to be willing to hold the U.S. and global economy on the brink of disaster in order to force Democrats to capitulate to their demands.

This way, too, Republicans can blame whatever economic fallout will come with either a default, government shutdown or cuts to Medicare and Social Security on Democrats. By pursuing these cuts during a Democratic presidency, they can point fingers at President Joe Biden if they are pushed through — potentially providing the GOP with a weapon come the 2024 election.

Republicans are laying out other plans for if they take the House, which polls say they are likely to do. GOP members of the House Education and Labor Committee have made a list of prominent labor officials like Labor Secretary Marty Walsh and National Labor Relations Board General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo as well as Biden’s pro-worker task force to target with hearings and attacks if they take control of the House.

117 notes · View notes

the-desolated-quill · 4 months

Text

#us politics

7 notes · View notes

satureja13 · 1 year

Text

Saiwa: “Omg Noxee! Why do you call me in when you’re naked!”

Noxeema: “Oh come on! You’ve seen me in less than that!” Saiwa: “Uhm... - GODS NO! ...haha I bet you say that to all the boys ;P ” Noxee laughs: “Not in a while ;) “

Saiwa: “But when did you find the time to decorate your room? You just arrived this morning.” Noxeema: “The technique is called: ‘Operation Decorator Storm’!” (Scene from the movie on youtube -> here )

Soundtrack on youtube: Wonder Woman Theme (1976)

Now the world is ready for you And the wonders you can do Make a hawk a dove Stop a war with love Make a liar tell the truth Wonder Woman! Get us out from under, Wonder Woman

---

Noxee: “But why are you here anyway?” Saiwa: “Oh - almost forgot! There’s a 70′s party for the students to ‘get to know each other better’... yeah, so we need some clothes and your advice.” Noxee: “Sure, send them up to the store in the attic...”

Noxeema: “I’ll throw myself something over then... better now?”

Saiwa: “Not really...”

Saiwa: “... your manties are quite nice though, where did you get them?” Noxeema: “I’m glad you noticed them! (Editor’s note: it was impossible to NOT notice them......) I ordered them for the shop and just tried them on. Grab yourself a pair too.”

The following posts have a kind of sad and frustrating side cause. We’re worried about the anti trans/drag laws in the US i learned about yesterday. Check -> here (Tennessee drag show restrictions, ban on gender-affirming care for minors signed into law) and -> here (Republican lawmaker George Santos implies he dressed in drag but denies ever being a 'drag queen'...) oh my ó.ò (I read it even will be forbidden then to wear women’s clothes when you are physical a man and vice versa... where do they draw the line then? If the cop thinks you are dressed too feminine/masculine you are screwed(?)...)

From the Beginning ~ Underwater Love ~ Latest

#Belgraves Institute #sims 4 story #sims 4 simblr #sims 4 transexual #sims 4 occult #sims 4 vanilla #Saiwa #giga byte #Noxeema Jackson #Underwater Love #Copperdale #Strawberry Cake Fashion #The 70s Party #operation decorator storm

51 notes · View notes

remyfire · 10 months

Note

🎲 for Piercentyre! -ypq

I need you to know I got so excited to see the boys and then this is what I generated.

Randomizer is a bigger fan than all of us. Anyway, you get a kiss on the forehead, hell YEAH, let's DO IT! Kiss Roulette

"Yo." As John strolls into the Swamp, he tosses the football he'd been carrying vaguely to the side.

As he probably should've anticipated, it beans Hawk in the head. "Hey!" Without another hesitation, Hawkeye grabs his pillow and chucks it at John.

He knocks it away with a grin, then drops onto his own cot. "Lemme borrow your razor."

"Go shave with this morning's toast," Hawkeye fires back.

Okay, so maybe the football had been a bad idea if he wanted a favor, but it's not like John can help himself. There's something about antagonizing Hawkeye just that little bit that brightens a part of John. It's similar to the good old days of paling around with his football team in college, even the harmless pranks they'd pick on each other with in medical school.

It's kinda different with Hawk. Sweeter on his tongue. But he doesn't have time to worry about that.

"C'mon, c'mon, I'm on a schedule right now. I got a date in, like, half an hour. If I don't grab a shower real quick, I'm gonna be late."

Hawk sends him a look. He's not placated. Not yet. Little shit. He grabs the most recent issue of Frolicking Nudists, flips it open, and starts reading. "Frank'll loan you his."

"Pretty sure human hair and ferret hair doesn't work the same. It won't do a thing."

"Then I hope Ginger likes stubble burn."

"Hawk, just for five minutes. You're not even using it right now," John points out. "What's the big deal?"

Hawkeye goes quiet for a long moment, and really that should put John on higher alert than it does, but he's also leaning back on his cot in one long, languid line, and John's gaze goes a little fuzzy just in time for Hawk to speak up with a very calm, "Okay, so suck me off, and you can borrow it."

He might as well be asking John to support Hawk's bid to become a Republican senator. "Say that again?"

"Suck. Me. Off." Hawk drops one foot to the ground, his boot making it land with a heavy thud, and the effect makes his legs sprawl wide open, lean thighs leading in a perfect V to his...

John shakes his head, clearing the onset of cobwebs in his skull. "Ha-ha, very funny."

"What's funny is that you think I'm kidding." Hawk flips to the next page of his magazine, then turns it on its side so he can fully open the centerfold. He lets out a low whistle. "I'm 0 for 5 with nurses this week, Trap. If I don't get something, I'll probably burn up into a fucking crisp."

"Is that how it works?" John bats back immediately, trying to ignore the heat in his cheeks. "You don't get lucky, your blood boils so hot that you burst into flames?"

"Something like that," Hawk drawls. He glances over the top of the magazine, and though John can only see his eyes, he knows what it means when they crinkle at the edges. "Ohh, you look like you might know a little something about it. What's the matter? Getting a little flushed, big guy?"

"Shut up." John scoffs and shakes his head. "It's fucking hot out, c'mon."

"Uh-huh." He sounds the furthest from convinced he can possibly be. When Hawkeye disappears behind the nudie mag again, he keeps talking. "Fine, fine. I'll settle for a kiss."

John flicks his tongue out, moistens his lips. "Oh yeah?"

"Yeah, sure. Consider it swallowing your pride. Crawling over, begging for mercy, all that."

"All I hear is you still tryin'a get me on my knees."

Hawk laughs. "You're gonna be thinking about nothing but that from here on out, aren't you? Wonder what Sidney would have to say."

Nothing that John hasn't spent years doing a tap dance over like a guy trying to kill a roach, but who just can't catch it.

He doesn't know if it's the war, the distance from anything sane, or just the magnetic fucking force of his pretty bunkie, but there's something about being here specifically that keeps blowing up that bonfire inside of him bigger than a billboard.

John rubs his sweaty palms on his fatigues, then shoves himself to his feet.

Immediately, Hawk drops the magazine to his chest, and they lock eyes. John's not sure how he manages to take these careful steps forward without his blood melting his veins and muscles all in one, but. Somehow. He does. One by fucking one.

He gets caught up in the minute shifts of Hawk's expression, how he goes from the earlier annoyance to neutrality, then uncertainty. Right when John's stopped at the very edge of his cot, there just a taste of something else. Vulnerability. It's in his eyes, big and blue and...and begging.

Jesus, Hawk, what the hell are we doing?

John comes down on one knee, hovers his hand awkwardly in the air, then smooths Hawk's feathery hair out of his face. For a second, he almost thinks he makes it up, but yeah, no, Hawkeye just let out the quietest, softest groan through those parted lips. How can he do that? How does he make it that easy, letting what he wants show so vividly in his gaze, in his voice? How is he not scared to fucking death right now?

John hesitates. A knot swells in his throat. And before he can change his mind, he leans in and leaves a lingering kiss on Hawk's forehead.

Hawkeye sucks in a shuddering breath. "Hold on a second."

"You didn't say where," John tries to whisper back, but it comes out as a ragged growl.

Hawk pins him right there with his stare, something that heats up until it's molten. But his jaw tightens just that little bit, and it tells John they've danced around this yet again.

"Never let it be said I'm not a man of my word," Hawk drawls as he rolls over, opens his trunk, and pulls out his shower kit. "Here."

"Thanks." John grabs the razor, then snags his robe and towel. "I'll bring it back when I'm done."

"Uh-huh."

John's almost fully out the door when Hawkeye calls after him. "There's a return fee too, y'know."

John rolls his eyes as he keeps walking. That flush in his face stays ruddy and hot.

#FELLAS you're GAY #ty for the meme!!#piercintyre #traphawk #trapper john mcintyre #hawkeye pierce #m*a*s*h #my writing #ask meme answers

19 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 4 months

Text

Dave Whamond :: @DaveWhamond

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 28, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JAN 29, 2024

Today—last night U.S. time—three military personnel were killed and 34 more wounded in a drone attack on the living quarters at a U.S. base in Jordan, near the Iraq-Syria border. U.S. troops are stationed there to enable them to cross into Syria to help fight the Islamic State. There have been almost-daily drone and missile strikes on U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria since the October 7 attack on Israel by Iran-backed Hamas. The U.S. has blamed Iran-backed militant groups for the attack, and while no one has officially claimed responsibility yet, three officials from such groups have said an Iran-backed militia in Iraq is responsible.

President Joe Biden today called the act “despicable and wholly unjust,” and he praised the servicemembers, who he said “embodied the very best of our nation: Unwavering in their bravery. Unflinching in their duty. Unbending in their commitment to our country—risking their own safety for the safety of their fellow Americans, and our allies and partners with whom we stand in the fight against terrorism.”

“And have no doubt,” he said, “we will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner [of] our choosing.”

Republican war hawks have called for retaliation that includes “striking directly against Iranian targets and its leadership,” as Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) said, or by “Target[ing] Tehran,” as Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said. Republicans are blaming Biden for failing to “isolate the regime in [Iran], defeat Hamas, & support our strategic partners,” as Representative Carlos Gimenez (R-FL) wrote on X, formerly Twitter, today.

But there is, of course, a larger story here. The Biden administration has been very clear both about the right of nations to retaliate for attacks and about its determination to stop the war between Hamas and Israel from spreading.

Iran would like that war to spread. It is eager to stop the normalization of relations between Arab states and Israel, and is backing Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon—all nonstate militias—to try to stop that normalization.

They are trying to stop what Patrick Kingsley and Edward Wong outlined in the New York Times yesterday: a new deal in the Middle East that would end the war between Hamas and Israel and establish a Palestinian state. The constant round of phone calls and visits of Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken with at least ten different countries is designed to hammer out deals on a number of fronts.

The first is for a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel, which would require the exchange of more than 100 Israeli hostages taken on October 7 for thousands of Palestinians held by the Israelis. The second is for a new, nonpartisan Palestinian Authority to take control of Gaza and the West Bank. The third is for international recognition of a Palestinian state, which would be eased by Saudi Arabia’s recognition of Israel. If that recognition occurs, Arab states have pledged significant funds to rebuild Gaza.

Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has rejected this proposal, but his popularity is so low people are talking openly about who can replace him. Hamas and Iran also reject this proposal, which promises to isolate Iran and the militias from stable states in the Middle East.

Behind this story is an even larger geopolitical story involving Iran’s ally Russia. As Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg retorted when Senator Wicker called on Biden to respond to the attack that killed three Americans “swiftly and decisively for the whole world to see”: “Wasn’t funding Ukraine and Israel the first, critical step in deterring Iran? We are in this place now due to the Russian fifth columnists in the Republican Party including Trump who slavishly do Putin’s bidding.”

Rosenberg was referring to the fact that Iran is allied with Russia, and Russia is desperate to stop the United States from supporting Ukraine. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, apparently thought his February 2022 invasion of Ukraine would establish control of the eastern parts of that country in a matter of days. Instead, the invasion has turned into an expensive and destabilizing two-year war that has badly weakened Russia and that threatens to stretch on.

In the United States, today marks the 100th day that extremist Republicans have refused to provide supplemental funding for Ukraine or Israel arguing that funding to protect the U.S. border must be addressed first. On October 20, 2023, as David Frum pointed out today, Biden asked Congress for “$106 billion to aid Ukraine and Israel against attack by Russia, Iran, and their proxies.” That funding has bipartisan support, but “[f]or 100 days, House Republicans have said NO,” Frum said. “Today, Iranian proxies have killed Americans.”

Republicans’ insistence that they want border funding has proved to be a lie, as Democratic and Republican senators have hammered out a strong agreement that extremist Republicans now reject. Former president Trump has made it clear he wants to run on the idea that the border is overwhelmed, so has demanded his supporters prevent any solution. Today, on the Fox News Channel, when asked why Republicans should let Biden “take a victory lap” with a border deal, Senator James Lankford (R-OK), who has been part of the border deal negotiation team, responded with some heat:

“Republicans four months ago would not give funding for Ukraine, for Israel, and for our southern border because we demanded changes in policy. So we actually locked arms together and said we’re not going to give you money for this, we want a change in law. And now it’s interesting, a few months later, when we’re finally getting to the end they’re like, ‘Oh, just kidding, I actually don’t want a change in law because [it’s] a presidential election year.’ We all have an oath to the Constitution, and we have a commitment to say we’re going to do whatever we can to be able to secure the border."

MAGA Republicans in charge of the Oklahoma Republican Party showed where Trump Republicans stand when they voted on Saturday to “strongly condemn” Lankford for “playing fast and loose with Democrats on our border policy.” They said “that until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him.”

In The Atlantic, Frum noted that “vital aid to Israel and Ukraine must be delayed and put in further doubt because of a rejected president’s spite and his party’s calculation of electoral advantage. The true outcome of the fiasco in Congress will be the collapse of U.S. credibility all over the world. American allies will seek protection from more trustworthy partners, and America itself will be isolated and weakened.”

Rosenberg wrote: “If you are unhappy with Iran today, first thing you should do is come out for funding Ukraine fully. Nothing will embolden Iran more than a Russian victory in Europe.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Dave Whamond #Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #The Atlantic #Immigration Reform #Election 2024 #US Foreign policy #war in Ukraine #war in Israel #Iran #radical republicans #MAGA #Putin Republicans

4 notes · View notes

libertariantaoist · 1 year

Text

News Roundup 6/11/2023 | The Libertarian Institute

Here is your daily roundup of today's news:

News Roundup 6/11/2023

by Kyle Anzalone

US News

A group of Republican senators on Thursday introduced a bill to repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was passed in the wake of the September 11th attacks and is still being used to justify wars today. AWC

Russia

Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said Thursday that Russian forces repelled a Ukrainian attack in Ukraine’s southern Zaporizhzhia Oblast as Western media outlets are reporting Ukraine’s counteroffensive has officially begun. AWC

Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev said Thursday that Ukraine was ready to sign a peace deal with Russia in the early days of the war but gave up on negotiations due to US pressure. AWC

Two recent reports have uncovered billions in trade between members of the North Atlantic alliance and Russia since the Kremlin ordered the invasion of Ukraine last year. The Institute

The Department of Defense announced on Friday it will purchase $2.1 billion in weapons for Ukraine, including munitions for Patriot and Hawk air defense systems. AWC

Stockholm plans to send a “signal to Russia” by allowing NATO troop deployments in Sweden before the country is admitted into the alliance, according to top officials. Turkey is holding up Sweden’s bid to join the bloc. AWC

As part of a “deepening” military partnership between Iran and Russia amid the war in Ukraine, US intelligence officials believe Tehran is assisting Moscow in building a drone manufacturing plant that may be operational next year, the White House said on Friday. American officials claim hundreds of Iranian drones were transported to Russia via the Caspian Sea last month. AWC

China

The Pentagon on Thursday dismissed a report from The Wall Street Journal that claimed Beijing and Havana have reached an agreement in principle on China establishing a secret spy facility in Cuba. AWC

The US, Japan, and Taiwan are preparing to share real-time data from naval surveillance drones in a move sure to anger China, Financial Times reported on Thursday. AWC

Middle East

According to a report from Middle East Eye, the US and Iran are near a deal that would reduce Iran’s uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief, although it’s not certain that a final agreement will be reached. AWC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Secretary of State Antony Blinken that no deal the US makes with Iran would prevent Israel from attacking the country over its nuclear program. The Institute

#kyle anzalone #libertarian institute #news roundup

8 notes · View notes

battleangel · 7 months

Text

Black Mirror, Pigrape & WW3

There is one thing that causes poverty, inequality, food insecurity, houselessness, starvation, unequal medical care & inhumane living conditions more than anything else --

Wealth is passed down generationally to heirs.

Literally, thats it.

Children usually inherit their parents estate.

So, wealth is naturally concentrated amongst the global elite 1%.

Virtually all of the laws in the world allow parents to confer their wealth to the next generation -- their direct heirs -- upon their death.

So, the cycle of the worlds wealth being in the hands of the 1% is never going to change.

You will never get the Waltons (Walmart), the Hiltons, etc. to not keep their money concentrated within their respective bloodlines.

These millionaires and billionaires also give money to politicians that allow their families, companies, corporations and enterprises to continue their profiteering, corporatism, exploitation, non-stop lobbying, union busting and their CEOs making thousands more than the people actually working for these companies.

This will never change.

The politicians want the funding from these millionaires and billionaires to keep flowing to them from the owners, founders & CEOs of these corporations and the families that found these corporations and their CEOs want to keep the money strictly within their respective bloodlines.

This also applies to any real estate, land and assets owned by the parents upon their deaths, per virtually all of the laws in the world, all of this wealth gets passed down to their heirs, usually their children, upon death.

As long as the parents had wills and living testaments and they all do (global elites), the above situation is going to play out every time keeping the elite 1% in control of over 99% of the earth's money.

There are movements for this wealth to be confiscated by the government, etc.

Its theater.

Its Obamas lip service to undocumented folks while throwing more children in cages than Trump.

The policies and laws never actually change because the politicians dont want them to as they are paid off by and funded by these same global elites.

Its why Cruz as a conservative voted for TPP.

Its why Biden as a Democrat is a total Zionist and war hawk.

There are cosmetic differences between the two parties, the duopoly - Democrat "vs" Republican, but the true power brokers behind the scenes and behind the curtain hand pick the people who get to ascend to the US Presidential throne.

All 200+ Presidents are part of the same royal lineage that dates back hundreds of years to the royal family in the United Kingdom.

Please look it up.

Every single one, including Obama.

Figure out who the Reptilians are.

They are the Kingmakers.

They decide all US presidential elections.

All of these things are written decades in advance.

They already know when China is going to demand the US to pay back the debt it owes them.

Our biggest "enemy" is the country who has purchased the most of our debt -- ask yourself what sense that makes if this isnt by design.

The moment China demands that we pay back the debt we owe them (look into how many trillions in US bonds China has bought), the US dollar will instantly crash.

Right now, the US dollar is used essentially as the worlds currency but you can google how weak it currently is.

Geopolitically, militarily and economically (GDP), the US is number 1.

However, we are trillions of dollars in debt to China.

Trillions of government programs are currently unfunded right now due to how massive the government debt is ($17 trillion).

The moment China demands that we pay up the debt we owe them that they have purchased, the US dollar will crash and we will go bankrupt as a nation.

Medicare is an unfunded government program and liability.

So is Medicaid.

So is Social Security.

Military, highways, hospitals, schools.

The US dollar crashing will crash the worlds economy since the US dollar is still used as the standard despite how weak it is due to all of our national debt.

China, with their Yen, will then be in the strongest position.

The Yen will take over as the worlds currency standard.

China will bankrupt the US.

Chinas economy and military will then be #1.

They will attack our extremely vulnerable and purposely antiquated electrical grid and cause nationwide blackouts that last for months via highly sophisticated & coordinated EMP attacks.

There will be Chinese terrorist attacks aided by Iran and Russia.

China, Iran & Russia will also attack London (UK).

They will attack the White House, Washington Monument and the Pentagon.

Watch ID4 and get a clue.

All our symbols of national power will be attacked, eviscerated and incinerated.

They will blow up Mount Rushmore.

They will detonate a nuclear weapon in the mid-west and threaten to detonate additional nuclear weapons in New York City, Los Angeles and other major metropolitan US cities (Chicago, Miami, etc.) unless we surrender.

They will also have a nuclear weapon aimed at the White House but the President will be in a bunker with his family and the Secret Service.

Watch Black Mirror and get a clue.

It will be kabuki theater.

The President, First Lady and their children as well as the VP, spouse and their children will be murdered on a live social media feed if the US doesnt surrender and the above named US cities will be incinerated like Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Unconditional surrender or millions will die instantaneously from the nuclear weapons but then look up the horrific after effects of the radiation poisioning on the surrounding "surviving" populations of Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

The FBI & CIA elite know of these threats now.

The US President & family and VP & family will actually be safe in a bunker but the bunker will have a recreated Oval Office.

Its just kabuki theater.

It will be streamed live on every US TV channel, Netlix, Hulu, Disney+, Facebook, IG, TikTok, Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube & Twitch.

The US will surrender to save the President (nothing but a figurehead exactly like how the monarchy functions -- "God Save the Queen!") and the "millions of lives in the US cities targeted by the nuclear weapons".

The fake explanation will be, "We could fire back with our own nukes but by then the President, First Lady & VP would be murdered and 'untold millions' will have been wiped out in every major US city."

The President ("Commander In Chief") , Secretary of Defense and Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff will negotiate the US' surrender to "save millions of lives" as China will literally have its raised finger above the red button of the nuclear weapon.

And it will all be fucking fake as fuck.

It wont be a real detonation button or a real nuclear weapon.

The President, First Lady, VP and their families are all actually in a secure bunker that just has the Oval Office recreated in it.

There will be a surrender streamed live to China (and Russia and Iran).

This will happen a year or two into World War 3 between US & Israel & London (UK) vs China, Russia & Iran.

I predict WW3 will start next summer (2024).

This dovetails nicely with the US Presidential election November 2024 and also with the fact that student loans just went into repayment this Fall.

I want YOU to give your life for a worthless fucking college degree!

We will be winning until China does the above.

All planned in advance and fake as fucking fuck.

They're nothing but WWE and soap opera storylines, all written in advance, and behind the scenes all the wrestlers hating each others guts and the soap actors bitch slapping each other around all get along really well.

Its nothing but theater for the audience.

Noone is a face, everyones a heel.

Noone is a soap opera villain.

Theyre all on the same side just working the audience up with fake ass rivalries.

All those 18 to 21 year old boys on ALL sides murdered for absolutely fucking nothing.

Hamas' propaganda videos are no different than the US militarys and IDF's (Israel Defense Force) propaganda.

There will be hostages raped and executed live during the social media stream.

Its the pig being fucked in the ass on Black Mirror.

Nothing but kabuki theater.

Its viscera and terror to subdue, sublimate & control the masses.

Its Hunger Games:

President Snow : She's become a beacon of hope for the rebellion, and she has to be eliminated.

Plutarch Heavensbee : I agree she should die, but in the right way, at the right time. It's moves and counter-moves, and it's all we gotta look at. Katniss Everdeen is a symbol. Their Mockingjay. They think she's one of them. We need to show that she's one of us. We don't need to destroy her, just the image, then we let the people do the rest.

Plutarch Heavensbee : Shut down the black markets, take away what little they have, then double the amount of floggings and executions. Put them on TV, broadcast them live, sow fear, more fear...

President Snow : It won't work. Fear does not work as long as they have hope, and Katniss Everdeen is giving them hope.

Plutarch Heavensbee : She's engaged. Make everything about that. What kind of dress is she gonna wear? - floggings. What's the cake gonna look like? - executions. Whose gonna be there? - fear. Blanket coverage. Shove it in their faces. Show them that she's one of us now.

Plutarch Heavensbee : They're gonna hate her so much they just might kill her for ya.

President Snow : Brilliant.

Its to traumatize on a mass scale and induce terror to make the populace sheep that submit and obey.

This is why the fear of death is so critical and why they encourage it at all times.

The fear will be visceral and palpable as death is laughably presented in society as the "worst thing ever to be avoided at all costs" when in fact it is nothing but a beautiful transformation and evolution to your eternal energetic state and a final ascension from the human 3D realm ("real life" aka the simulated virtual reality) back to the eternal limitless 10D dreamscape that we all originated from as the limitless eternal energetic beings that we all are.

We are all gods, small g.

We have all existed for eternity in the dreamscape.

We do not have a beginning or an end.

We are as limitless as our minds and imaginations because we ARE our minds and imaginations.

Its what we literally are.

Our 3D limited physical human bodies are nothing but vessels.

Our souls and our hearts and our minds inside of the physical husk and vessel is what we are truly made of.

We are energy and we are literally nature.

Its why nature is what heals us.

Reiki heals us.

We can heal ourselves.

But we do have a natural end to our lives as physically manifested humans because this is an extremely temporary state that we currently inhabit so to prolong life with endless interventions, harmful medical treatments, surgeries, medications, radiation, hormones, chemotherapy, prescriptions literally makes no fucking sense.

Accept your temporary manifestation as a physical human being.

Heal yourself through self healing practices.

medicinal plants & herbs

marijuana

psychedlics

nature -- rivers, streams, natural sunlight NOT artificial lighting, oceans, beaches, mountains, forests, moon and the stars, the sky, fresh air, trees

shamanic healing

witch doctors

indigineous medicinal practices

market limpia

deep REM restorative sleep = temporary shift in consciousness back to the dreamscape which is why its so restorative

water = temporary human vessel is 80% water it is energy and sustains life - drink 64+ oz a day and minimize juice soda coffee & alcohol

sound bath healing

weightless floating in water

listening to mhz frequencies

meditation

expressive movement of the body -- hula hooping, pole dancing, dance, aerialism, fire breathing, magic tricks, martial arts, trapeze, etc.

expressive art -- poetry, slam poetry, stand up comedy, acting, writing, painting, drawing, clay, pottery, theater, improv, etc.

self reiki

shadow work

somatic work

journalling

sabbatical

solo trip

excursion

inducing your own ego death and killing your human ego

self actualization & self ascension

opening your third eye

kundalini awakening

aligning & activating all seven chakras

eliminate all toxic energy vampires -- malignant narcissists, dark empaths, abusers, sociopaths -- from your energy orbit & aura including and especially spouse, significant others, adult children, parents, mother, father, siblings, brothers, sisters, grandparents, grandmother, grandfather, aunts, uncles, supervisors, managers, co-workers, mentors, coaches, teachers, professors, priests, deacons, deaconnesses, pastors, ministers, nuns, best friends, friends, etc. -- no matter how difficult or controversial or how much you are judged, go low/limited/no contact with all toxic energy vampires -- even the matriarch and patriach of your entire family -- and remove them from your obit and aura so they can stop energetically attacking you and draining your energy and depleting your aura and psychically attacking your psyche which can result in an eventual psychotic break where your literal psyche is broken-- these attacks lead to all kinds of physical and mental maladies, disorders, conditions, diseases, illnesses, compulsions, addictions, etc. that are actually being caused by constant and insidious energetic & psychic assaults and auric attacks

leave any job that has toxic energy vampires -- and this is actually every job as capitalism is based off of the exploitation of the worker via constant and sustained energetic and psychic attacks and auric assaults on your aura -- this includes a passive aggressive supervisor, co-workers, stakeholders, clients, cross-functional collaborators, your +1, your HR generalist or HR business partner, work mentors, work sponsors, executive leadership, officers of the company, CEO, vendors, prospects, etc. -- psychic & energetic attacks at work include constant emails & IMs, unreasonable & unrealistic demands, forced & mandatory unpaid overtime as a salaried employee, golden handcuffs as an executive where you exchanged a fancy title for having a life outside of your big important job, working 70 to 90+ hours a week and essentially living at your job to flex on the gram & LinkedIn at the big 4/financial services/big tech, a cultish environment like Amazon ("peculiar ways", "Leadership Principles", "Every day is Day 1", etc."), humiliations/condescencions/interruptions/belittlements/beratements/insults/being talked down to/talked over at meetings, projects & ideas stolen, microaggressions/racism/misogyny/homophobia/transphobia/misogynoir/unconscious bias/hostile work environments, verbal and mental abuse, being purposely overworked, underpaid & never appreciated, training your own replacement, being laid off when your employer made billions in record profits, being used when someone else takes credit for your work and gets a promotion and you dont, work becoming your identity and central form of validation

leave the 9 to 5 capitalist structure as well as any job in capitalism with a supervisor and mandated schedules including corporate, academia, non profit, retail, food service, medical industry, military, K-12 schools, colleges & universities, libraries, museums, etc.

become a freelancer (delivery driver, rideshare driver, content writer, virtual assistant, cold calling, data entry, etc.)

Get ready for the pigfucking.

Get ready for WW3.

Get ready for the Black Mirror & the Black Parade.

2 notes · View notes