HONG KONG AND KASHMIR. AN UPDATE

 Folks, I don’t typically do this, but I read something this morning that compelled me to do a quick follow up on the topic of Hong Kong. For the life of me I don’t understand why the US has suddenly validated the  fears of Beijing.  The rumor and right now it may just be a rumor, of the US tying its trade negotiations to China’s actions in Hong Kong is insane.  I know full well there are people inside the intelligence community and private industry that realize the significance of Hong Kong to Beijing.  To somehow believe that the Chinese can be pressured into allowing Hong Kong to continue to spiral out of control in defiance of Chinese  baffles me .  If this strategy is actually taking place behind the scenes as well, then I’m not sure where this is all heading. Playing the Bluff game for economic leverage  is one thing, but taking part in what could quickly become brinksmanship, well, like I said I’m at a loss .

Kashmir:

 Is it difficult for China to ridicule India over the events in Kashmir and at the same time crush the protesters in Hong Kong? Yes, the answer is yes but the greater question is, does Beijing care?  India understands  the growing relationship between Pakistan and China and they understand the threat that means to Indians future. This is quickly not becoming an issue of protesters and territorial rights. It could be becoming an issue  of Super Power confrontation!  

Sidenote :

 The lack of coverage on both of these issues by Moscow is telling. Yes, there has been some minor press coverage but one would expect far more input from the Russians than what we have seen and that is even more interesting .

 Like I said, just a quick update but these two stories could have major implications for world stability. 

CITIES. HOW ARE THEY CHANGING AND WHAT MIGHT IT MEAN?

Two points right off the bat. 1. I'm going to address cities in the US, but I realize some of the comments could easily apply to many other nations. 2. If you read this and you live in a large city, you may never read my post again. So be it.

Before I get started, I fully realize many of you are going to read this and say to yourself," so what? Cities have been different from the countryside since day one". For the sake of argument, I will state I agree with you. What has changed is time, size and awareness, and so I am going to press on with my opinion and see if I can't make you understand the issue from a different light.

For the past several US Presidential Elections, I've seen a map some organization has complied that depicts the voting status of the nation by county. In each case the overwhelming percentage, like 85 percent or better, of the US landmass has shown to be "Red" or Republican / Conservative.  Each one of these maps has depicted the same results for the "Blue"  or Democratic areas, with only slight variances in percentage. The major cities in the US are "Blue", about 15 percent of the landmass, don't hold my percentages to an exact standard but I know they are really close. What does that mean? Is that phenomenon new? Is it worth paying attention to? Does most of the nation say, " so what"? Well, it's the 21st century and yes, yes it does mean something and let me tell you why.

Back Then:

Throughout time, cites have been their own entity. Yes the people outside the cites new they were there and some were close enough to travel to them if they needed or wanted to, but day to day life didn't revolve around such locations. I can remember driving down the road in Southern Missouri with my Grandfather who was in his 90s, listening to him talk about how the trip we were on that took 90 min use to take him a full day. that was in the early 70s so  you do the math. The Big City was St Louis and people went there for excitement or to purchase things that you simply could not find out in the country. By the way, in my opinion, the area outside the cities is referred to as, "the country" for a reason. Back then, cities were hardworking industrial centers where people went to make their fortune, or so they thought. In the industrial age, cities worked around the clock. There was not rolling up the sidewalks, look it up if you don't know what that means, at 6pm. Back in those days, cities were large, but the majority of the population still lived far enough away they had little in common with "city folk". Elections were won by "stumping" the countryside and not just winning the city vote and here is where my opinion starts to take hold.

What they have become: 

Are cities modern day, technological wonders? Most would say yes, to some degree. Mass transit, huge sports complexes, high rises. Yes, some are amazing to gaze upon. Zoos....did I mention Zoos? St. Louis Zoo.....it's the best in the world....really. Large Cities became modern day marvels and just about everyone wanted to live in one, but then the inevitable happened. Political parties began to realize the major cities were growing so big, they didn't have to " Stump" the countryside nearly as extensively as in the past. The major cites had grown to the point, enough votes could be won just by winning the majority of the votes in the cities. Short answer, the trend of the countryside becoming less relevant had begun. With the onset of unions, they swing to one political party was set into motion, a motion that would last for decades. Promises were made for the sake of votes, nothing new there, and the color of the major cities was nearly cast in stone. Then, the worse thing, for that party that is, began to happen. The jobs began to go away and with that, the fear of the votes leaving the concentrated areas of the large cities became a reality. One party had only one choice, they had to make the large cities the center piece of a voting block that would be too dependent on that party to ever leave the city. Okay. I know this is where some will think I am getting on a soapbox, but if you can prove me wrong, then do so. Large cities became "safe voting blocks" and all that was needed was to continue to provide as many "entitlements" as possible. Now, here comes the really tough love part. Not only did one party come up with a strategy to keep a voting block in the cities, they had to frighten that block into believing someone wanted to take those "entitlements" away from them. "Vote for us or you will be tossed out with the trash"! Yes, fear tactics set in and they were reinforced by just about everyone involved in this particular political party. Well, before too long, large cities were not just economic engines for the nation, they were guaranteed votes...dependent on one party for just about every need the "city folk" may need. Sound outrageous?  Again, prove me wrong.

Look, I could talk all day about the status of large cities in the US, but here is the down and dirty. The rest of the nation began to live with the nickname of, "flyover Country" for a reason. There is a reason this same political party in question has now openly called for doing away with the Electoral College. Why? Because the large cities have a majority of the population now, for now that is, and with that, the political party in question simply doesn't need the "flyover Folks".....but....only if they can get rid of the Electoral Collage. Once again, those pesky Founding Fathers are in the way of power and control.

 A Nation Divided: 

Here is what I have been driving towards. History is a great cornerstone of knowledge, but times do change and complex societies, ones that have over 3 BILLION people able to communicate 24/7/365 without filters, are going to encounter issues that history has not set examples for. What holds a nation together? If you said a common good.... a common goal, then you are on the right track. In the past few years, even decades, how often have you heard, " I don't give a hoot what LA or New York does are thinks. How many times have you heard the major news networks, focus on the coastlines? If you googled CNN or MSNBC for the term, "flyover Country" what would that number be? Folks, the US population is growing apart.

When I was 30 yrs younger, would I have believed I would look the news and listen to major cities openly tell the federal government, federal law doesn't apply in "their city"? Sanctuary Cities...I'm talking about Sanctuary Cities! What if George Wallace would have tried that approach? Oh...that's right...............he did. what happened? His National Guard was federalized and used against him, that's what happened. When I was a Cop in Ft. Worth and St. Louis, would I have witnessed, other than the city of Dallas and that is a story for another day, national leaders from one party, to include the President accusing Law Enforcement in general of being discriminatory or racist? Yes, we witnessed this in the 60s, but it wasn't coming from the federal government. It wasn't coming from the President of the United States.

If large cities are going to be allowed to ignore federal laws, make up their own rules regardless of what the federal government states, where does it stop? One party is in favor of allowing illegal entry to the US in massive numbers and again, those cities that agree simply ignore federal law. Where is that heading? What happens when "Flyover Country" says, " If it's okay for the large cities to make up their own rules, then it's okay for us to make up our own as well". Then what? What happens when "flyover Country" doesn't want to be be affiliated with large cities? Think it can't happen?  Come to Texas and ask anyone who lives outside the cities of Dallas, Houston, Austin....good grief....Austin, San Antonio what they think of what goes on in those cities. Just how much more division can the US withstand? Does it even begin to worry you? it should. The major cities in the US are growing more and more distant from the rest of the nation and nobody on either side seems to mind. In reality, most are even glad it's taking place. Where does that leave the US? People in the US often hear talk of 'division", but are they taking that worn out phrase for granted? Do they really see what the future might hold? Can cities produce energy? No, at least not most of them. Can they produce food? Nope. Can they manufacture the luxury items they are addicted to? That capability is dwindling away.  The fact of the matter is, big cities live off of life support from the areas outside the city. Don't believe me? Watch the next time a Hurricane or Earthquake hits one. Look at New Orleans in Katrina.

The real Danger: 

What do nation state's real enemies constantly look for? yep. weaknesses from within. Was the 60s just an issue of the war and civil rights? Yes, but to an extent. Did our enemy, the Soviet Union, leverage the 60s? You bet they did. Has that concept changed? Absolutely not! It's an old saying and it's one the US has used to it's advantage in the past. " A house divided cannot stand"! The US large cities continue to morph into something the rest of the country is not comfortable with. Morals, Ethics and social norms are growing apart at an alarming rate. Is that a danger to the survival of the nation? Truly, I cannot think of a more dangerous topic. A crazy strong economy is the glue that keeps it together.......for now!  If that glue melts, then what? Worse. Who is out there trying to make that glue melt?  " Nations without borders". Who supports the concept and why? Who supports the idea of taking the world economy off the dollar standard? Is the US living on a razor's edge? That my friends is up to you to decide.

PS. I said this story was applicable to other nations and I can assure you I am correct in that assumption. 

HONG KONG AND KASHMIR. 

HOW ARE THE TWO RELATED? 

Last night, I posted a podcast, they are getting funner with each passing day, on the topic of Kashmir and why the event was not "typical" of the constant tensions between India and Pakistan. At the end of that post, I told everyone I would jump back to the topic of Hong Kong for my next post as that issue seems to be heading for even deeper troubled waters. Well, when I sat down today to collect my thoughts on the Hong Kong issue, it dawned on me, the two are interrelated and far more so than most people realize. So, here we go. Let me draw the lines between the two and see where it takes your opinion. 

Coming of Age:

If the events in Kashmir and Hong Kong show the world anything, it's the reality that in the not too distant future, global issues will be addressed or initiated without the guidance of the West / US.  Now, before you jump to the conclusion this is yet another opinion on the decline of the West / US, let me just say this. You may be correct, but before you give up and don't finish reading this post, let me give you a warning as to why you just can't walk away from this opinion. As a reminder, who is it that Beijing blames for the crisis in Hong Kong? if you saw one of my post on Twitter this morning, @ColDan11, you noticed my swipe at the idiot Nancy Pelosi. For her to come out and make a statement that the events in Honk Kong, " is a beautiful sight to behold", well, as I stated in my Twitter post, many a conflict have been based upon the ignorance of political leaders. Did her words stoke the paranoia in Beijing? How could it not have. Do they see her as a second string idiot? Let's hope so. As much as China would like to blame the US for what is taking place in Hong Kong, at the end of the day, the Emperor knows the real issue is Beijing. The center of the tension is the Chinese assault on individual freedoms. Hong Kong is a threat to China and China knows this could just be the beginning of social unrest inside the Empire.  Try as they may, blaming the US will not solve the unrest they are facing and that makes the whole situation even more dangerous than if the US really was behind the event. 

Kashmir is yet another example of the West / US  sitting back and observing a bad situation become much worse. By the way. We could blame the West / UK for the clueless borders they put together at the end of World War I, but that's a story for another day. What makes this situation even more dangerous than Hong Kong is the reality the two parties involved have nuclear weapons. Did I mention they don't like each other? If you didn't know that, you need to know. It's not bomb-shelter time yet, but the threat is out there. Yes, the US and others can attempt to plug in all the typical breakers that are normally applied to incidents between India and Pakistan, but that whole issue of relevancy comes back to to the forefront. The "issues" between India and Pakistan are not controlled by the West / US. Worse than that, the key player in this game of Risk is the very nation that we just finished talking about. China. How does China manipulate the issue of Kashmir? What side does the Empire take? Are the ties with Pakistan stronger than those with India? Is India a larger threat in the near future? Ah, now there is the issue at hand! Fifty years from now, who does China worry about? the decaying West  / US , or the other nation that will have 2 BILLION people by then as well? India will have huge needs and so will China. Can two nations on the same course keep from colliding? There is a opinion in the US, one I happen to agree with, that it's better to take on China now than attempt to do so twenty years from now. If you ask me, it's the real reason behind the so called Trade Wars. As bad as things might get economically, can the West  / US afford to face a China twenty years from now? Can China wait to see if India falls apart? Should China act to bring India down a few notches now and perhaps avoid a much larger issue down the road? If you are one of those who has sipped the Kool-Aid of an India / China relationship, I'm afraid you've not been paying attention. 

Changing of the Guard:

  Are the days of the West / US manipulating what is taking place in the world coming to an end? Did Obama do more harm than most of us realize? If someone is trying to paint a picture of the West / US being irrelevant in the near future, than they have an agenda are are most likely running for office somewhere. Having said that, here is the stark reality. The ability to control events from a Western perspective is fading, but at a pace most people sitting in their living rooms don't see. Kashmir and Hong Kong are events that DC will will have little impact on and that's only if DC attempts to do so. Don't forget, it's " Pon Farr" season in the US and unless there is a great deal of blood the media can cover, they are all stuck on the political mating dance and nothing else matters. Iran grabbed yet another tanker last week. Get my point?

Times change and often that is not an indication of better times ahead. Did the US start World War I or World War II? Argue if you want over the economic conditions, but the first shots fired did not come from the West. Is Kashmir a real danger? yes. Is China involved in the danger? Yes. Is Hong Kong a real danger? Yes. Is China involved? Yes. Do you see a pattern here? It's not bunker time yet folks, but you may want to have a good set of plans on your desk! 

HONG KONG. JUST WHAT IS GOING ON? 

Hong Kong. I touched on the topic last week, but it seems to be an issue that is not cooling down. Who does Hong Kong belong to? If you ask China, the answer is black and white. If you ask the people of Hong Kong, you get a very different response.  Now, we could kill time talking about the history of Hong Kong and what agreements were made, but if you know me, that's simply not my style. Hong Kong is a "issue" with the Chinese and in an age of perceptions, the "issue" of Hong Kong cannot be underestimated. 

Facts: 

Events in Hong Kong are based upon a large percentage of the people simply not wishing to be assimilated into the Borg ship called China. Can they completely break away? no. Can they attempt to form a working relationship that allows them to be somewhat attached to China? Well, that was the initial agreement, but times have changed and China has changed. What is Honk Kong to China? If you answered an economic engine, you are only partially  correct. If you answer Hong Kong is a potential thereat to the communist form of government in China, BINGO....you win the prize. Fact. Hong Kong is a threat to the new emperor and his dream of world dominance. Fact. Outside forces are at play in making Hong Kong a point of tension with the emperor. Now, is that "outside" force based upon the US? In my opinion, that line of thought gives too much credit to the US's strategic planing process. The US now lives in a perpetual cycle of elections and spends most of it's energy in a continuous game of campaigning. Could the US be responsible for what is taking place in Hong Kong? Maybe....................maybe! Here is the most important fact to take away from this post. The Emperor and his court believe, truly believe, the US is behind the events in Hong Kong and at the end of the day, that is all that matters. 

What does the Emperor believe:

Hong Kong is being leveraged as part of a much larger plan to "contain" China. "Contain". A word US political leaders have used over and over again. It's a word that could easily come back to haunt them as well as the American people. Hong Kong is a pawn in the US / China trade wars. Again, perception is reality in the 21st century. American flags, The Star Spangled Banner. What else is Beijing to believe? Funding and coordination to student activist groups in Hong Kong. Try not linking that to the West. Okay, here is the bottom line. Beijing is convinced the US is behind the events in Hong Kong. Now, in order to get this story to where it needs to be, we need to move off this point and concentrate on some level of predictive analysis. 

What does it mean: 

What options does the Emperor have for this issue of Hong Kong? That my friends is where the real danger begins. As I have said before, can the Chinese simply crush the protesters in Hong Kong? If they decided to do so, it would only be an indication of just how worried they had become of what the whole thing could lead to. By the way. Some "experts" say the level of nationalistic pride in China's youth is higher than anywhere else in the world. If that were true, Beijing wouldn't be as upset as they showing us.  To them Hong Kong is a crack in the armor and they fear that crack may spread. If nationalism was so strong, that worry would not be there. China is worried and a worried China can easily turn into a angry China and an angry China has many...... options.

Options:

What is the historic, classical response to external interference? If you answered counter interference, wow, you are on a hot streak. Let's pick a few options we need to watch for. 

North Korea:

Yep, the Rabid Dog on a short leash. A few missile test simply may not be good enough. If Hong Kong doesn't calm down, perhaps the Little Fat Boy in North Korea is ordered to break off all ties with The Donald. Wouldn't the Democrats love to jump on that issue. You can bet the Emperor knows that option is out there. What is The Donald going to do, go to war with North Korea in an election cycle? Not hardly. Yes, North Korea and everything bad thing about that place could now be in play.

Iran:

Iran desperately needs a life support nation. Just today, TASS ran a story about a "new agreement" between Russia and Iran and a pending joint operation in the Straits. Is that true? That's a whole different story to address, but it would be easy for China to add to the tension. Did anyone happen to see the story last week concerning tankers outfitting themselves with Chinese flags in the Straits? Again, that's a story that needs to be addressed as well, but is Iran in play over the Hong Kong issue? You better believe it is.

Venezuela:

Sound unrealistic? If you said no, wow, you are on your way be becoming a Talking Head on cable news. Pressure in the US's "backyard" is not a new concept to Beijing and such a move would be a real "tit for tat" when it comes to the issue of Hong Kong. Close your eyes and imagine an announcement from Venezuela on a "joint" military base in Venezuela. Chinese aircraft and ships not just visiting,but stationed there. Oh, by the way, you can toss in US arms sales to Taiwan if you need more fuel for this theory. 

Mexico:

Mexico? Did I say Mexico? yes.....yes I did. Just how upset is Beijing? Upset enough to strike a deal with the new ultra Socialist President of Mexico? All it would take is the rumor of a "joint" Chinese / Mexican adventure and DC would finally pay attention to it's neighbor to the South.  Want to rule this scenario out?  Let's see how bad Hong Kong gets. 

Okay, I could go on and on, but here is the overriding point. Beijing is not going to take the events in Hong Kong without countering in some manner. Does the Emperor blame the US? We've already been over that point. Is Hong Kong vital to China's future? It's not just vital, it's critical. 

With so much going on in the world, it's easy to not focus on this Hong Kong issue. As the US slips into the electoral version of Pon Farr, miscalculating China's temperament is a very....very...dangerous course of action, but then again, once the US Pon Farr starts, nothing....absolutely noting else matters. 

THE ART OF WAR IN THE 21ST CENTURY.

Master Sun was a 6th century expert on the art of war. His concept of how a conflict should be fought from a perspective of mental preparedness is timeless. Here is the problem. Probably 1/10th of 1 percent of the political leadership in this world have taken the time to not only read Master Sun, but to comprehend what he was saying. Is the next major conflict going to be different? Absolutely. Will any of those involved in the event follow the wisdom of Master Sun? I doubt that very much. So, why bother with this post? Why go back and rehash a topic I have covered time and time again? I will tell you why. Because the "art of beating the enemy mentally next time around is going to be vital to who comes out victorious. 

Messages that seem to go unseen:

Last week, Europe suffered from a nearly complete failure of Global Positioning Systems / GPS networks. So widespread was this event, most "experts" found it highly unlikely this event was some type of software hickup. In reality, GPS "games" / Weapons Test, for that is what I believe these events are, have been going on for several years. In reality, these "weapons test" have been taking place all over the globe, but like any weapons program under development or upgrade, the owner must continue to "test" them from time to time. It is these "test" that adversaries typically gain knowledge of only once they are underway. Last week in Europe is the latest example. Now it seems, MI-6 believes the latest round of GPS weapon testing took place during the incident with the tanker Impero. Was the tanker in Iranian waters? No, or Tehran would have used that as the excuse. Did the tanker think it was further away from Iranian waters than it actually was and thus allowed the IRGC to have a much faster turn time during the highjacking? most likely. Should the UK have seen how close the tanker was getting to Iranian waters, if this story is true, then yes, they should have. Have the Russians provided the Mullahs with this level of technical capabilities? If so, the "message" there is more important than the event itself. Remember the Master's point about the mindset of the enemy. Was this the topic of the news media in the US this week? Of course not. Did the "right people" take notice? Oh........you bet they did. did the other side, the US, take a turn at the same game? Yep. Remember my comment about the power grid events in Venezuela last week? Yep..... messaging, unless our adversaries took a shot at that weapons test knowing the US would take the blame. Fun game huh?  

Selfish promotion time again:

How much do I believe this new version of warfare will determine the course and outcome of the next major war? So, much so I used one of these events to become the baseline for my book. Look, folks, for those of you who don't spend your day, and I hope that is most of you, wondering how the next conflict might start, where it will take place and why, let me make a very dark prediction. If you think anything you have seen on the news media in the past thirty years will give you an idea of what would take place, you are in for a terrible surprise. I've said this before, but I will keep saying it because it's important. Most of the people in this world will understand something major is taking place not by seeing some "expert" on cable news telling you what you should think. Most will find out when they realize everything they come into contact with doesn't work. Last week, Europe could rely on GPS. This week, ships were lied to by their own computers. Two months ago, American Airlines could schedule flights to the right location. Weapons test. That is what these events most likely were. It's that level of confusion and panic I address in "pending" book....yep....pending..It's at the Kendal review level right now:). 

Imagine:

Imagine a mobilizing military unit's logistics section preparing to have follow on equipment from commercial vendors ready to show up at another location and then, weeks later finding out that equipment was shipped somewhere else. Imagine a Fighter Wing preparing to deploy only to find out all the unit's medical data has been lost or corrupted. Imagine, three weeks into a conflict and suddenly, hundreds of members of the 82nd Airborne's families are notified in the middle of the night their loved ones had been killed. Imagine trying to explain to all of them the text and emails they received were not true.  Imagine thousands of over the road truckers getting bad information on what items to pick up and where. I could go on and on, but the point I am making comes back to Master Sun and one of his primary principles of war. You must understand what impacts your enemy the most and you must be willing to use that weapon without remorse. Years ago, people sat in Las Vegas and watched nuclear weapons being tested just North of their location. Many even had parties for such events. Today's weapons test are taking place all around us, but I don't think you will see any parties. 

A few days ago, I was on Dan Horowitz’s show and the topic was Iran. I like talking to Dan given he is a Constitutional Law expert. Anyway, he asked me to provide an update on what was taking place with Iran and where I thought the issue may be heading next. He was a little taken back when I gave him my opinion. You see, the last time I was on his show, I made a real argument about how confused I was over the actions of Team Trump. It seemed Tehran was beating the US around the head in the perception game and at that point in time I think I was right. The called off limited strike by the US was the apex of what seemed to be a completely disorganized US plan. I believed that then and I still had that opinion on Dan’s show this time around. But and this is a huge but, something changed and that change is what I spent most of that hour addressing. I know Dan has a large following on his show, but I also know a lot of people outside the US read my blog. So, my goal today is to give you my opinion of what I believe changed with Team Trump. 

Let the experts talk:

On the day The Donald decided to go with a COA/ Course of Action / given him by his, “experts”, most likely his National Security Advisor and his Secretary of State, two men who rumor has it, The Donald is having issues with, it was clear the administration was in near meltdown mode. Calling off whatever strike package had been approved and doing so at the very last second, gave the world the image of a US overwhelmed. As I stated on this site shortly after that event, it was most likely the CENTCOM Commander who convinced the President to stop the mission and that was probably based upon intelligence that showed Tehran was going to respond in a disproportionate manner. By the time this event was over, it was clear the President was completely frustrated. This was the first time in his term as President that he had to make a snap decision and one that was on a topic he truly had little background in. Much like Obama in Syria, The Donald was faced with a situation that could easily and quickly slide into a conflict no one in the US was ready for. Now, here is where it gets really interesting. A frustrated Trump has to be an ugly thing to watch. I have visions of LBJ during Vietnam and the fits he would display with his staff. Here is the other part of that picture that has to be considered. When this event was taking place, the pressure was on to do nothing that would upset the 2020 re-election process, a process that was already underway. The Donald had campaigned in 2016 that he would not take the US into another never-ending war as well as stating other nations needed to solve their own problems. When he was informed that Tehran was about to respond in a way that would quickly get out of control, he did the right thing, He asked his Combatant Commander what they should do and folks, there is the difference between an overwhelmed Obama or LBJ and The Donald. He asked the right person at the right moment in time what to do. Not his National Security Advisor. Not his Secretary of State, but the person who would be responsible for whatever action Tehran was going to take. Speculation? Yes, but my speculation is just as good as any other talking head who comes on network news. 

The lightbulb comes on:

The Donald did the right thing, he called off the strike, but then the perception battle was lost, at least temporarily and that is a concept that is vital in today connected world. Within a day or two, as it became clear just how bad the perception event had become with Tehran gloating, The Donald made another right move. There had to be a better plan for dealing with the Mullahs and it had to be based on keeping his word from 2016, but how? With everyone giving their opinion once again, I believe The Donald turned to the person who represents a group he has always admired and listened to. He once again turned to his Combatant Commander. All along, this Commander had provided input as to what was taking place with Tehran, but that input is scrubbed by several levels of policy and political “experts”. The polite way to say this is, the Commander’s ideas are either revised to make the rest of the staff look good or they are scrubbed to the point what is given to the President is nothing close to what the Commander wanted to say. That is the Normal way of how bunnies is conducted, but The Donald is anything but “normal”. It is my belief the middleman was cut out of the picture and The Donald turned to the CENTCOM Commander and said, “ what should we do”? I can tell you if that happened, those that think they control access to the President were more than angry. In typical Trump style, he turned to someone he respected and tossed out protocols and with that, we now see a new approach and it’s an approach that fits with the 2016 pledges to the American people.

Pressure:

Let’s assume I am correct. Let’s assume The Donald placed the process of dealing with the Iranian crisis on the shoulders of the CENTCOM Commander. Was the Commander ready to take on such a task? You can bet your life he was and is. When The Donald asked him, what should the US do, the answer came straight from the Commander, unfettered with two key people looking on with Steam coming out of their ears and we know who I'm talking about. When this Commander was given the opportunity to state how he would handle the situation, he was prepared. 

Pressure. It's a high-risk game when dealing with an unstable, radical government. The sanctions concept was a pathway to pressuring the Mullahs, but did the US ever have a plan ready in case the Mullahs chose conflict instead of capitulation? Was the concept of getting Moscow to agree to implement a regime change in Iran truly on the table? Who on Team Trump's staff supported such a move? Are there members who simply feel like striking the Mullahs is the real option? Just what did the CENTCOM Commander recommend? By looking at a few key events since the called off strike, we may be seeing a picture of a changed strategy. 

1.  The call for unified support in the region was a concept pushed by the CENTCOM Commander. It's his staff that truly works issues day in and day out with the nations of the Middle East. The rest of the DC crowd flys in and flys out after a fancy lunch or a quick photo op and if you have ever worked in the region, you know full well, the status of a US four Star General is far greater than any Son in Law or Ambassador or Secretary of State. It's just how the region works. Getting the Gulf Nations and "others" to prepare for greater pressure on Tehran was a CENTCOM generated concept that only the four-star could pull off. 

2. Getting the British to make the first move on an Iranian load of fuel was a tactic that only true operators could come up with. Ones that work the region every day of the week. By the way, the IC / Intelligence Community, have people assigned to CENTCOM and many have been there for years. It's a One Team, One Fight family and it's a powerful took when coming up with contingencies. Did the planners anticipate the Mullahs striking out at British assets first after this seizure event? You bet they did. Did you notice the results of the attempted attack on the HMS Duncan never indicated what finally came of the bomb boat? Think about it. Did the actions of the HMS Montrose catch the Mullahs off guard? yep. Yes, the IRGC was able to capture another ship afterward, but that was most likely a calculated risk, given the defensive posture and density of assets in the area of operations. The reality was and is, the narrative of what is taking place in the region was changing and the perception battle was beginning to turn. 

3. Meeting with Hassan Kohmenei. Remember what I said about the IC having people assigned to CENTCOM. On a typical day, those people have the same restrictions the CENTCOM Commander has. Ideas are vetted by the parent agencies before they are placed on the table for the CENTCOM Commander. If the CENTCOM Commander was told to take lead on the Iranian crisis, then that means his staff was allowed to do so as well. The members of the IC still need to wash their opinions with Headquarters in DC, but the four-star gets final authority on information provided by the IC members. So, think about it. The US meets with the Grandson and a few members of the IRGC, something I addressed last week, and that story / rumor gets back to the Mullahs. Once again, what is the true objective? Changing the narrative of the whole event, that's what. 

What does it mean?

Is the situation dangerous? You bet it is. Is it possibly going to lead to confrontation? yes. Is the US seemingly gaining an upper hand? slowly, very slowly. Could deals be underway that are based on day to day relationships and not fly in and fly out political stunts? you bet. the deployment of US assets to PSAB in Suadi is not the work of the US DoS. It's the work of CENTCOM. It's the work of those who truly know the region and understand what it will take to defeat the Mullahs on the battlefield or by internal events. 

Team Trump needed to get into campaign mode and the events of the on and off attack were going to lead to a potential campaign bonanza for his opponents.  In my opinion, The Donald has turned the Iranian event over to the one organization that knows what can and cannot be achieved. The Donald most likely gave very angry and very clear guidance to his staff, all of them. The CENTCOM Commander has the lead on the Iranian issue and everyone is going to support his plan. Does this mean we are in calm waters? no. The Mullahs have want they want for now. They have a ship and the US / Brits have a ship. Do the Mullahs need to create the next event? most likely. How soon? That depends on how hard the sanctions are hurting? Are the Mullahs willing to sit down with the US? NO, not now and that leads to them making the next move, but the one thing we may be able to count on is the fact that next move is now being responded to by the right team...........Team CENTCOM. In the meantime, The Donald is on the road and pulling crowds that resemble 2016. If Iran strikes out, it will be impossible for the left to blame Trump, but don't fret, they will..................you know they will. 

IRAN'S NUCLEAR "DEAL" IS STILL ALIVE

So the EU states the Iranian nuclear "deal" is still alive? why of course it is. After all, what has Iran done to jeopardize the trust of the EU? Let's see. They have attacked six tankers in the past two months. their proxy fighters have launched countless missile attacks into Saudi Arabia. They attempted to highjack a British tanker. They shot down a US drone. They have threatened all shipping in the straits. They have demanded the EU take a knee and pacify Tehran's demands for economic aid. It's easy to see, the Mullahs have done nothing, "significant" to upset the agreement. with today's announcement from Ms. Mogherini, I am confident the threats and actions from Tehran will halt immediately. Mogherini. that must be French for Chamberlian. 

Now what:

Now that the EU has once again, done what they do best, take a knee, the question becomes, now what? Let me give you just a few clues. 1. The Mullahs will now up their demands. Not only will they want their oil to flow wherever they want it to, but they will also demand the EU pressure the US into discontinuing the sanctions. Now, they know full well the US will not listen to the EU, at least not as long as Trump is in the White House, well........at least I think the US won't. Rumors continue to flow of the US looking for an "offramp" from the Iranian issue. If that is true, and I am beginning to fear that it is, the old men in Tehran will turn up the heat even more. How ironic given that just a little over a week ago, the UK slapped the Mullah's upside the head of the attempted highjacking of the UK tanker. I could go on and on about the, " now whats", but let me take you back to a stark reality that somehow everyone seems to just wish away. 

The last vote:

Who gets the last and most important vote on the Iranian "deal"? Yep.....Israel. Does Israel need the EU's permission or support to act against the Iranian nuclear program? No. Does Isreal need the support of the US to conduct military operations against Iran? In a perfect scenario, yes, but with the recent backing down of Team Trump on the pending actions against Iran as well as the rumors of the US now looking for an "offramp", Israel may be coming back to a sobering reality, a reality they lived with for eight years under Obama. In the end, Israel may stand alone to prevent the Mullahs from obtaining nuclear weapons. If Team Trump is now looking to kick this issue past the next election cycle in the US, well, that gives the Mullah's breathing room. Even better for the Mullahs, if Trump were to lose, in the minds of the old men in Tehran, they might just be in the clear. They might think that, but their military commanders know better. 

How bad can it get:

Teletubbies of the EU will not prevent Israel from defending itself. Words spoken over a fancy conference table will not prevent the Mullahs from continuing their plan. If times change and Israel must act unilaterally, the repercussions will rest squarely on the shoulders of the EU and the US political circus. Netanyahu stated Europe is repeating the same mistakes of the 1930s. I am confident very few people understand the validity of his statement.  

Is Israel prepared to go to war to prevent nuclear weapons in the hands of the Mullahs? yes. Could that include a preemptive strike, a strike the EU and the US Democratic party would blame on Israel? yes. Does anyone know this? yes. The US, Russia and several others believe this reality. Are they in a position to stop such an event? Yes. How? Can a regime change take place in Iran without the US being involved? yes, just look to Moscow for the clue. Would Israel warn the US and Russia of a pending first strike? Perhaps the US, but the warning to the Russians would be just prior to offensive operations getting underway. Are the Israelis prepared for the response the Mullahs might authorize? Yes, at least as best as they can be. How can Israel mitigate that response? Here is the ugly part. If the days comes this horrific battle unfolds, look for the IDF to strike in an overwhelming event. What options would be left off the table for Israel? none, and I think you understand what I am implying here. 

Reality:

The EU can stick its head in the sand and repeat the nightmare of WWII. The US can allow it's cyclic political circus to make poor decisions. None of this will matter the moment Israel's intelligence agencies truly believe the Mullahs are about to have a nuclear capability. Look. let me make this as clear as I can. With the US's total support, the Iranian capabilities can be dramatically reduced in a very short period of time. does that mean yet another conflict in the Middle East? Does it mean it could happen before the next election cycle? That is up to the Mullahs. But......if.......if it happens and the military power of the US is not combined to quickly reduce Iran's military to the point the damage to the region and Israel is kept at acceptable levels, whatever that might be, and things start to go bad for Israel, then no one and I mean no one should be shocked at what takes place then. Yes, these are hard times. Yes, the American people have a war aversion. Yes, the EU believes the Mullahs are controllable. Finally; yes, the Israelis will do whatever needed to stop what it seems everyone else is just trying to wish away. The US wants an "offramp? Okay. I say that ramp only exist in one location, Moscow. Regime change doesn't have to be a US operation, but the price for convincing the Russians to make the event a reality is most likely high, very high. Perhaps a satellite image of the IAF uploading a "special" payload would convince someone the time to take an easier route is growing short.