Russia Burns, have a Free eBook!
Blinken speaks French plays Rock and Roll..."Non, je ne regrette rien."
Free eBook. Thank you for reading!
Free eBook Today
might like it!News
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraines-drones-attack-russias-only-black-sea-oil-refinery-1901712
https://www.newsweek.com/america-says-china-must-choose-between-putin-west-xi-1901296
Although I think it is over-stated I also think the risk of Biden (unintentionally?) driving China closer to Russia is real, thanks to his foolish 100% tariff on Chinese electric vehicles. Supposedly liberal internationalists and other capitalists are against tariffs since they distort investment flows and render the market inefficient. Furthermore, tariffs were shown quite clearly to have been a major cause of World War I. See, when you and your potential enemy are not even doing business with each other the likelihood of you going to war goes way up -- especially if each of you is already trying to destroy the others economy. Let me put it this way…
The Tariff Trap: How Protectionism Fosters War by Uniting Territory and Trade
In international relations, tariffs are divisive, distortionary, and dangerous. While proponents argue tariffs protect domestic industries and jobs, critics correctly claim that tariffs distort investment flows, render markets inefficient, and, most alarmingly, increase the risk of armed conflict. The poverty and isolation high tariffs cause make war a much less unattractive option than would be the case in a system of free trade and free cross border investment. The claim that tariffs cause wars may seem hyperbolic, but history shows that tariffs have played a significant role in causing war, particularly when combined with great power rivalries. Tariffs create a unity between territory and trade, isolate competing great powers, and thus exacerbate the risks of armed conflict.
The Unity of Territory and Trade
Tariffs, by their very nature, create a direct link between a nation's territory and its trade policies. By imposing duties on imported goods, governments aim to protect domestic industries and encourage consumers to purchase locally produced products. However, this approach also creates a sense of economic nationalism, where a country's economic well-being is seen as inextricably tied to its territorial sovereignty. This fusion of territory and trade can lead to a zero-sum mentality, where one nation's economic gain is perceived as another's loss.
In the early 20th century, the great powers of Europe were embroiled in a complex web of alliances and rivalries. The introduction of tariffs, particularly by Germany and France, exacerbated these tensions by creating economic barriers between nations. The German Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, famously declared, "We Germans fear God, and nothing else." However, his protectionist policies, including the 1879 tariffs on iron and steel, demonstrated a clear understanding of the connection between economic power and military might.
The Isolation of Competing Great Powers
Tariffs also isolate competing great powers, creating an atmosphere of economic hostility that can escalate into military conflict. When nations impose tariffs on each other's goods, they create a sense of economic siege, where each side feels compelled to respond with retaliatory measures. This tit-for-tat approach can quickly spiral out of control, leading to a breakdown in diplomatic relations and, ultimately, war.
The events leading up to World War I provide a stark illustration of this phenomenon. In the early 1900s, the German government, under Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, introduced a series of tariffs on French and British goods. The French and British responded with their own tariffs, sparking a trade war that would last for years. This economic conflict was further complicated by the complex system of alliances, which ultimately drew in more nations and led to the outbreak of war in August 1914. The only way to expand trade in the face of tariffs is to expand territory through war.
The Risks of Armed Conflict
Tariffs, by creating a sense of economic nationalism and isolating competing great powers, increase the risks of armed conflict. When nations are not economically interdependent, they are much likelier to view each other as adversaries, rather than partners. This lack of economic interdependence can lead to a sense of impunity, where nations feel free to pursue aggressive military policies without fear of economic reprisal.
The current tensions between the United States, China, and Russia provide a worrying example of this phenomenon. The Trump administration's decision to impose tariffs on Chinese goods, including a 100% tariff on electric vehicles, will likely meet with retaliatory measures from Beijing. This trade war has not only disrupted global supply chains but also created an atmosphere of economic hostility between the two nations. The risk of miscalculation or unintended escalation is high. Furthermore, the Biden administration's decision to maintain these tariffs has raised concerns that it may inadvertently drive China closer to Russia. This would be a catastrophic development, as it would create a united front against the United States and its allies. The consequences of such an alliance would be far-reaching.
Conclusion
Tariffs, by creating a unity between territory and trade, isolating competing great powers, and exacerbating the risks of armed conflict, are a dangerous policy tool. While they may provide short-term benefits for some domestic industries, they can have devastating long-term consequences for international relations. The example of World War I and the current tensions between the United States, China, and Russia serve as stark reminders of the risks of protectionism.
In contrast, policies that foster economic interdependence through free trade and cross-border investment help reduce the risk of war. By creating a sense of mutual economic benefit, nations are more likely to view each other as partners, rather than adversaries. This approach requires a willingness to compromise and cooperate, but the rewards are well worth the effort.
The international community navigates the complexities of the 21st century, it would do well to remember the lessons of history and avoid the tariff trap. Washington is terribly unlikely to be able to impose a unilateral global tariff system, fortunately for everyone.
The above is somewhat inaccurate: there are many more ties between post-world war II fascism and the PLO than between China and the PLO. In fact, there are more links between the USSR sponsored Japanese Red Army and the PLO than their are between the CCP and the PLO. However, the article is at least thought provoking and worth reading as an example of cherry picking exceptional data points to try to force a conclusion that goes beyond those facts linking a past historic conflict to a current event. It is not disinformation in the sense of falsehood but is an example of how liberalism so often tries to "have it both ways" by being, shall we say "selective" about data points.
ACHTUNG, USNI!
Strategic Deployment of Commerce Raiders: A New Frontier for Ukrainian Naval Warfare
The conflict between Ukraine and Russia, sparked in 2014 and intensified with Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022, has compelled Ukraine to innovate in its defense strategies. Among the myriad approaches, leveraging commerce raiders, or Q-ships, to target the Russian shadow oiler fleet on the high seas presents a compelling option. Q-ships, disguised as non-military vessels but armed for combat, can exploit the vulnerabilities of Russia’s maritime logistics. This essay explores the rationale, strategic implementation, and potential impacts of deploying Q-ships to undermine Russian naval capabilities.
The Rationale Behind Using Q-ships
Q-ships, historically employed during World War I and II, are merchant vessels armed with concealed weapons designed to lure and destroy enemy submarines and raiders. Their use in modern warfare, particularly by Ukraine, offers several strategic advantages:
1. Element of Surprise: Q-ships can operate under the guise of civilian vessels, catching the enemy off guard. This deception can be particularly effective against the Russian shadow oiler fleet, which relies on ostensibly civilian tankers for logistics support.
2. Cost-Effectiveness: Transforming merchant ships into Q-ships is considerably more economical than building new warships. Given Ukraine's limited naval budget, Q-ships provide a cost-efficient method to enhance naval capabilities and project power on the high seas.
3. Asymmetric Warfare: Q-ships fit well within the broader strategy of asymmetric warfare, where Ukraine can leverage unconventional tactics to offset the conventional superiority of the Russian Navy. By targeting the logistical backbone of the Russian fleet, Ukraine can inflict disproportionate damage relative to the resources expended.
Strategic Implementation
Effective deployment of Q-ships requires meticulous planning and coordination. Key aspects of this strategy include:
1. Selection and Conversion of Vessels: Ukraine should select merchant vessels that can be easily and covertly armed. These ships should blend seamlessly into civilian maritime traffic to maintain the element of surprise. The conversion process would involve installing concealed weapons, reinforced hulls, and advanced communication and intelligence-gathering equipment.
2. Operational Tactics: Q-ships should operate in strategic locations where Russian tankers are most vulnerable, such as known maritime routes used for resupplying Russian naval operations. These areas might include international waters where naval engagements are less expected. Q-ships must also be equipped with electronic warfare capabilities to jam enemy communications and radar systems.
3. Intelligence and Coordination: Successful Q-ship operations hinge on real-time intelligence. Ukraine must enhance its maritime surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, potentially leveraging satellite data and intelligence sharing with NATO allies. Coordination with Ukrainian special forces and conventional naval units can amplify the effectiveness of Q-ship missions.
4. Legal and Diplomatic Considerations: Operating Q-ships in international waters raises complex legal and diplomatic issues. Ukraine must navigate the intricacies of maritime law to avoid escalation with neutral states and ensure its actions are perceived as legitimate self-defense. Diplomatic efforts to gain international support and understanding of Q-ship operations are crucial.
Potential Impacts
Deploying Q-ships against the Russian shadow oiler fleet can yield significant strategic and tactical benefits for Ukraine:
1. Disruption of Logistics: The destruction of Russian tankers would hamper the resupply of fuel and other essential resources, undermining the operational capability of the Russian Navy. This disruption could force Russia to allocate more resources to protect its logistical routes, stretching its naval forces thinner.
2. Psychological Impact: The unpredictability and success of Q-ship attacks can have a demoralizing effect on Russian naval personnel. The constant threat of disguised merchant vessels could induce a state of heightened alert and paranoia, reducing the overall efficiency of the Russian fleet.
3. International Attention and Support: Demonstrating innovative and effective resistance can bolster Ukraine’s standing in the international community. Successful Q-ship operations would highlight Ukraine's ingenuity and resilience, potentially attracting further military and economic aid from allied nations.
Conclusion
In the protracted conflict with Russia, Ukraine must leverage every available strategy to defend its sovereignty and disrupt Russian military operations. The deployment of commerce raiders, or Q-ships, against the Russian shadow oiler fleet offers a novel and potentially transformative approach. By combining the elements of surprise, cost-effectiveness, and asymmetric warfare, Q-ships can inflict significant logistical and psychological damage on the Russian Navy. Through careful planning, international collaboration, and adherence to legal frameworks, Ukraine can turn the tide of naval engagements and strengthen its defense posture in this ongoing conflict.
Laern Chinese! a Bridge to new cultures!
When Maos troll Russians… Crime: A.