Biden gives Ukraine permission to strike targets in Russia with US weapons...

 

Joe Biden. Politico/AP.

The Biden Administration has given Ukraine permission to strike targets in Russia with US weapons. Politico. The weapons can only be used in the area of Kharkov, where Russia has had a successful offensive. The Biden administration claimed that the weapons could only be used in counter battery fire or to disrupt incoming attacks. US officials said that the policy preventing Ukraine from striking targets inside Russia outside of this exception has not changed. A ban on hitting civilian infrastructure is still in place, despite multiple Ukrainian attacks on civilians in Russia. 

My Comment:

This story is obviously getting overshadowed by the show trial in New York today. That's an important story but the fact of the matter is that Trump being convicted on false charges is not anywhere near as important as Biden making World War III a lot more likely. Indeed, the election is totally moot if we end up getting into a nuclear war with Russia. 

Despite what the Biden administration says this isn't about the Kharkov offensive. That offensive was mostly a probe by light infantry and was designed to force Ukraine to pull troops off of other fronts. In that it succeeded, Ukraine did throw all their reserves into the battle and even pulled troops away from other battles. But the offensive has now stalled out due to those forces. 

So why did Biden authorize this? It's not because of Kharkov but because Russia is readying a major offensive. Supposedly that offensive is going to be in the area of Sumy and my guess is that Ukraine wants to disrupt the troop concentrations there. They know those troops were there but were unable to do anything about it until now. 

Will it do much? Probably not. As I have been saying for months now, the problem for Ukraine isn't weapons it's the fact that they are out of recruits. They are down to drafting amputees and Reddit moderators and simply don't have the troops to stop a major offensive. It will increase casualties on the Russian side but won't actually change the outcome of the battle. 

More importantly, I see this as a green light for Ukraine to attack Russian civilians in this region. Ukraine has always shelled civilians, that's a major reason why they tried to hang onto Adveeka even after it was clear that they had lost the city. They had been shelling Donbass since the war began and were mad that they could no longer attack civilians. Of course this would be a war crime but that has never stopped Ukraine before. 

Russia will, of course, see this as a major escalation and there may be a response. Indeed, it's possible they will hit behind the lines in Ukraine or possibly beyond. Putin is a lot more level headed and sane than Joe Biden so I don't see him escalating at the moment, but anything is possible. I do wonder how much more Russia is going to take before they finally decide to strike back. 

Biden's $320 million pier in Gaza no longer operational after storm damage

 

The pier in Gaza. Fox News.

The Biden Administration's $320 million pier, meant to supply Gaza, is no longer operational after storm damage. Fox News. The pier was operational earlier in the week despite four support vessels breaking away. However, the pier didn't hold up to rough waters and broke apart. The pier would take at least a week to fix. 569 tons of aid have arrived at the pier but none of it has been delivered to Palestinian civilians. The failure occurred as Israel stopped up their attacks in Rafah.  

My Comment:

I previously said that building this pier was honestly impressive and was probably the only thing that the Biden Administration has ever done that wasn't a complete failure. Well, I guess that was premature to say the least! 

Of course, I never agreed with the pier in the first place. It's just another example of Biden's irrationality on the issue of Israel. If we are supporting Israel then why are we giving support to Hamas? The aid is supposed to go to civilians but there really aren't any in Gaza, support for Hamas is almost universal and even if that weren't true, Hamas was going to intercept the aid in the first place and ensure that it went to them and not to people that need it. 

The entire pier has been a debacle since. Though some aid has arrived it hasn't been delivered and we have also suffered casualties in the construction of the pier. Even when it was operational it wasn't doing what it was supposed to do. It hasn't appeared to have helped anyone, other than the bottom line of the defense industry. 

Will they be able to fix the pier? Probably. But it's going to be a temporary fix at best as it apparently can't handle rough seas. I am guessing the problem is that the pier is floating and not anchored to the seafloor. Without being anchored, I think the same thing will happen the next time the waters get rough. Which means more repairs and less time to actually deliver aid. Indeed, this thing looks like it will turn into a major money pit. 

A more permanent solution is possible, I think it would be easy enough to start to anchor the pier. Doing so would cost even more money but I think it's a lot better idea than keeping this thing floating. There might be other things they can do to shore up the pier, but who knows? I am not an engineer. 

As for the war itself, it seems that it's entering the endgame. Israel is attacking Rafah now and they have deployed their tanks to the battle. As Rafah is the last stronghold for Hamas the war might be reaching its end. However, urban combat is tough and it could take the IDF a long time to fully clear out the city. The funny thing is that the battle is now intense enough that I don't think they are going to be able to even deliver aid in the first place. 

Libertarians nominated Chase Oliver as their candidate after embarrassing convention.

 

Chase Oliver. Fox News/AP.

The Libertarian Party has nominated Chase Oliver as their candidate after an embarrassing convention. Fox News. Oliver got 60% of the vote in the sixth round of voting with his biggest remaining opponent being "none of these candidates" at 40% of the vote. Both Republican nominee Donald Trump and Independent candidate RFK Jr spoke at the convention but neither got many votes with Trump being ineligible. Oliver's victory is a blow to the Mises faction of the party, which is more right wing and conservative than Oliver, who is all in on LGBT rights. 

My Comment:

Much of the  attention given to the Libertarian convention was due to Donald Trump's speech with everything else being a minor distraction at best. The media loved seeing Trump being booed, but I think in the end he's the biggest winner of this convention to be sure. 

Why? Because they ended up with Chase Oliver for their candidate and the Libertarian Party has become a joke. Oliver is not a serious candidate and does not seem to have any kind of chance of getting the 3% that Trump was mocking the party for during his speech. 

Oliver is far left libertarian that seems to care more about LGBT rights than any other issue. That is not the thing that is going to get people that would normally vote Republican but are upset with Donald Trump. From what I understand he even supports puberty blockers for children, which is far outside of the norm for most people and something most libertarians probably don't agree with. I know he said he hopes to get 2% of the vote, but I doubt he will get even that.

Especially since there are other credible third party candidates. Though RFK Jr did not get a good reception from the libertarians either, he's a lot more likely to create an impact than Oliver will. Indeed, making RFK Jr. their candidate would have probably gotten the Libertarian Party more votes than they would have ever gotten before. But with them picking Oliver instead, they basically have no chance. 

Despite the cool reception I think both Trump and RFK Jr. were smart to speak to the Libertarian Party. Though it was a hostile crowd for both of them, I do think that they both succeeded in winning over disgruntled Libertarians who are not happy with the Oliver pick. It also shows the courage of both men, going into hostile territory and giving as good as they got. Biden would never have done so and if he had it would have been an absolute disaster. 

As for the Libertarians themselves, they are an extremely dumb party. Not only is Oliver a bad choice, they rejected Donald Trump's offer to give them a little power in his next administration. Rejecting that is an insane choice. Indeed, in a two party system it's often better to create a wing in one of the parties so you have at least a little power. Rand Paul is a great example of this, he's a libertarian at heart but he has done more for the movement as a US Senator than any of the most recent Libertarian Party candidates for President. Instead, the Libertarian party is making perfect the enemy of good and won't have much of an impact in 2024. 

As for myself, I don't really describe myself as a libertarian anymore. Though I like their stance on gun rights and foreign policy and I would rather live under a Libertarian administration than a Democratic one but they just aren't the party for me. They hate police regardless if they are good or not and they were the only people I have ever heard of that unironically defended price gouging during the 2020 pandemic. They also don't seem to have an answer for the far left. I'm all for people being left alone but the far left won't return the favor and the Libertarians care more about sticking it to the man than stopping them from destroying the country. 

The United Kingdom considers bringing back conscription and mandatory service...

 

UK Prime Minster Rishi Sunak. AP.

The United Kingdom is considering bringing back conscription and mandatory service for young people. AP. UK Prime Minster Rishi Sunak said that if the Tories win in the July 4th general election his government will bring back conscription and mandatory service for all 18 year olds. Only a small number of 18 year olds would be drafted while the rest would be drafted into one weekend a month service projects. Up to 30,000 would have to spend a year in the military. The UK has had an all volunteer force since 1960, though it has had recruitment problems recently. It is unclear how such a plan would be put into effect and British Home Secretary James Clevery said nobody would be forced to join the military. 

My Comment:

This plan seems like utter madness for a party that is already behind in election polls. The Tories have been in power for 14 years now and are unpopular but this plan is not going to help them at all. My guess is that they get badly damaged in the July 4th elections. 

Bringing back the draft, even if it is for a minority of 18 year olds, is not going to be popular. It wouldn't be popular under any circumstances outside of an invasion, but to do it during peacetime is not going to fly. Anyone who might be drafted or anyone who knows and cares about someone who could be drafted would be very upset about this. 

The context of this is the Ukraine war. Britain hasn't been as vocal about sending troops to Ukraine as France has but I know the parents of these 18 year olds understand that if they get drafted they could be sent to the meat grinder that is the Ukraine war. The UK military is a shell of their former self and they desperately need recruits even without the threat of a wider Ukraine war. Bringing back the draft is a way to do that. 

The service idea is a lot more justifiable. I do think this kind of forced volunteerism is at least defensible, but the problem with it is the fact that the government is compelling it. I don't sure how they are going to be able to force people to volunteer like this, though it would be a better way to spend money than a lot of the things the government wants to do. 

Regardless, I don't see this ever coming to pass. The Tories are about as likely to lose in 2024 as Joe Biden is here in the United States. And announcing this policy before the election is going to make their chances even worse. There is basically no way that this ever happens, at least in the current form under the current geo-political conditions. 

The whole thing reminds me of the scenes we have seen in Ukraine where draft officers have been shanghaiing people off of the street to be sent to the front line. Would there be a similar level of tyranny in the UK if this were to happen? It's very possible if a war is happening... 

It also makes me wonder if such a thing would happen here. America technically still has a draft system, I had to register when I was 18, but bringing it back would be even more unpopular than it would be in the UK. America has bad feelings about the draft after our experience in the Vietnam war and it would probably require a nuclear war or alien invasion to get people to support  another draft... But given how the government under Joe Biden just does whatever it wants without regard to legality or popularity I could see it happening regardless.

President Zelensky remains in power even after his term has expired.

 

President Zelensky. Reuters. 

President Zelensky remains in power even after his five year term has expired. Reuters. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that causes legitimacy issues for the embattled Ukrainian President and could derail any peace talks. Ukraine is under Martial Law and has canceled elections under their constitution. Putin was quoted as saying "But who to negotiate with? That's not an idle question... Of course we realize the legitimacy of the incumbent head of state is over,". The issue of negotiations is a pertinent one as Reuters has reported that Putin may be willing to settle with the land he has taken now. However, Ukraine says that Russia is not serious about a peace deal. Russia was also to hold elections, criticized by its enemies, during the conflict. 

My comment:

As an aside one of the most annoying things about writing about the Ukraine conflict is the constant and ever changing spelling of almost every person, place and thing in the conflict. I have seen President Zelensky's named spelled at least three different ways, including Zelenskyy and now Zelenskiy. It's infuriating and incredibly frustrating. 

As for the article itself, I have been very critical of Ukraine for this matter. Canceling elections and allowing a President to continue serving after his term expires is not the action of a healthy regime. I understand that what they are doing is "legal" under their constitution but it's still an absolute joke. 

Indeed, America has run elections during both World Wars and even during the civil war. Russia itself was able to run an election during their war with Ukraine. But Ukraine can't do so? Why not? Are they afraid Zelensky is going to be voted out? I understand that the logistics are difficult, but no so difficult that they can't actually do anything about it. I also think that it has little to do with Russia's new offensive, they had plenty of time to hold an election during the winter/spring mud season which slowed combat to a crawl. The fact that they didn't shows that it's not about the military emergency, it's about holding onto power. 

Putin is right that this raises legitimacy issues. Of course we shouldn't take Putin's word on it but I have to say that I'd be just as critical of him if he canceled Russia's elections because of the war. There is plenty to criticize about the legitimacy of Russia's Democracy (though not as much as the west says and most of the actual problems Russia has are also present in Ukraine and the United States for that matter) but at least they are bothering to hold elections. That isn't the case now with Ukraine. So much for being a bastion of "democracy". 

But I also agree with Zelensky on one thing. I don't think that the story that Putin is willing to settle for what he has now is real. Reuters quoted four anonymous sources and you know how I feel about anonymous sources. I think it's real in that Russia would probably take a deal that accomplished most of their goals in Ukraine, but it's absolutely not something that Ukraine and NATO would be willing to agree too. 

It also makes zero sense for Putin to back off now. If he does he would allow Ukraine to rebuild their military and start the war up again at a time of their choosing. He also would not accomplish his goal of demilitarizing and denazifying Ukraine. 

And seriously, why would he do so when the military situation looks so good? A small recon force was able to gain more territory back from Ukraine in the Kharkov offensive than Ukraine took back during the entire summer offensive last year. Ukraine is down to drafting amputees and even Reddit moderators (which, if you know anything at all about Reddit, is the most pathetic thing you can think of) so it's not like Ukraine is doing well in the war. Why snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

Finally, I do think that Zelensky's hold on power is a lot less solid now than it was earlier in the war. Not everyone in Ukraine is happy about what he is doing and he already faced a major assassination plot recently. Now the fact that he continues to hold a position that he no longer earned through an election I think the chances of Zelensky being offed are a lot higher than they were before... 

Biden's approval rating remains abysmal.

 

Joe Biden. Reuters. 

Biden's approval rating fell to it's lowest rating in two years in a Reuters poll. Just 36% of voters approved of Joe Biden's job performance, a two point drop since last April. It matches the lowest approval rating in the poll since 2022. The poll found that Trump beat Biden on the economy, immigration and foreign policy. Foreign policy may have a lot to do with Biden's stance on Israel with both Israel and Hamas supporters upset with Biden's take on the war. Biden's only advantage was a slim one when it came to who voters trusted on dealing with political extremism. 

My Comment:

Man, it was hilarious reading that article since Reuters is so biased against Donald Trump. They just had to go on about January 6th and the idiotic trial in New York, neither of which will have any effect on the election at all. They must have been tearing their hair out having to cover how poorly Joe Biden is doing. 

Most of this is not new, Biden has had poor approval ratings for much of his presidency. And Trump has been overtaking him on most issues. After all, the economy is bad and immigration is totally out of control. With inflation still rising and the prices of good and necessities well out of the reach of normal Americans it's no wonder Biden is getting poor marks on the economy. 

What is somewhat surprising is how badly Biden is doing on foreign policy. Trump is beating Biden there at 36% to 29%. For all the hand wringing people made about Trump starting World War III, Biden has essentially done it and in my opinion is the worst foreign policy president in US history, and it's not even close. 

Much of the disapproval comes from Biden's handling of the war in Gaza. Amazingly he has managed to anger both sides of the conflict, with the pro-Israel people utterly disgusted with his criticism of Israel and the pro-Hamas side infuriated with Biden for supporting Israel at the same time. It was always going to be a lose-lose for Biden there, but he managed to fumble it so bad that he's losing both groups!

But it isn't just Israel, it's Ukraine too. Biden's Ukraine adventure is failing and failing badly, to the point only the most deluded of NAFO supporters online still think that Russia isn't going to win. Given that Biden could have easily prevented the war, or allowed it to end peaceable, this failure is entirely on him. 

Keep in mind that Biden's foreign policy failures go beyond even Ukraine and Israel. He also has pushed Russia into the arms of China and has overseen the comeback of ISIS and other terror groups. He also lost Nigeria and, more critically, oversaw the humiliation which was the Afghanistan withdrawal. Do voters know all of this? Possibly. But it again infuriates me that none of this came up during the 2020 election... 

The other surprise to me is that Biden gets points for combating political extremism. The possible conclusion is that voters think Trump is too extreme, but I am not sure. I personally think Trump could have done more to deal with the extremists in the Democratic coalition, like antifa and BLM. Regardless, Biden is absolutely terrible on this issue given how extreme he is and how he's letting the pro-Hamas people run wild on campus. 

Again, most of this is not new and it also does not bode well for Biden in 2024. It's very unlikely for a president with approval rates in the 30's to get a 2nd term. And that's assuming things don't get worse for him. Since Ukraine is likely to be a huge liability for him and the economy is being held together with duct tape and string, it likely will.. 

Helicopter with Iranian president and other high ranking officials crashes.

 

Photo showing the helicopter that crashed. IRNA/AP.

A helicopter with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and other high ranking officials has crashed in Iran. AP. Raisi had been in Azerbaijan for a dam opening ceremony and the helicopter had a "hard landing" after the visit. The helicopter went down in mountainous terrain and the area is also forested. Bad weather, including large amounts of mist, have complicated rescue efforts, which continue. It is unclear if Raisi is alive or dead, with the government instructing people to pray for Raisi. Raisi is considered a hardliner and was in line to replace Ayatollah Khamenei. The incident comes after high tensions in the region after tit-for-tat strikes between Israel and Iran. Iran's relations with Azerbaijan are also considered strained due to a terror attack targeting Iran's embassy last year and Azerbaijan having good relations with Israel. 

My Comment:

My guess is that President Raisi is dead and Iran just hasn't been able to confirm it yet. Helicopter crashes are not easy to walk away from and Turkey supposedly has footage of burning wreckage. And even if Raisi survived the crash itself it is taking so long for rescuers to find him he could have died from injuries or exposure to the elements right now. My guess is the only reason they haven't announced his death is because they haven't been able to actually reach the site. 

It sounds like the helicopter went down in a remote part of Iran, far away from any rescuers. The weather conditions, which may have played a role in the crash in the first place, appear to be making things dramatically more difficult to the point where they had to call in a Turkish drone equipped with IR cameras to see the site of the crash. 

A world leader presumably dying in a helicopter crash would be a big story at anytime but given the extreme tensions right now there are going to be people who believe that this was an assassination and not an accident. It's certainly worth considering that this could have been an attack on Iran's leadership. And regardless of what actually happened, people will believe this to be an assassination regardless.  

I would caution against that. The most obvious reason being that we don't even have confirmation that Raisi is dead, though it seems very likely. The other reason is that sometimes helicopters do in fact crash. Indeed, they are considered dramatically more dangerous that airplanes due to how low they fly, how complex they are and how few failsafe's they have in comparisons. Iran's president dying in a helicopter crash would not be unprecedented. Indeed, there have been enough celebrities, including Kobe Bryant and Stevie Ray Vaughn, that have died that it does not seem unusual. 

Of course this could have been an assassination, though I think that is unlikely. And even if it isn't, it's possible that it could be treated as one. Israel is the obvious suspect but I don't think they would want to stir the hornet's nest like this. They had their little tit-for-tat exchange with Iran and the issue appears to be settled at this point. Why risk a major conflict with Iran  at this point? It doesn't make any sense. 

A more likely possibility is terrorism. ISIS is active in both Iran and Azerbaijan and they could have possibly snuck a bomb on board the helicopter. That also seems unlikely given that the helicopter would have had high security. I guess the helicopter could have been shot down, but I still think the most likely scenario is that the helicopter just crashed because that's what they do on occasion. 

What are the repercussions for this incident? Hopefully minor. I am hoping cooler heads prevail and that this is proven to be an accident. Who knows, Raisi might even be found alive and well, though that seems very unlikely at this point. If not then Iran will have to face a difficult transition to a new president. Hopefully things don't go any further than that but given how high tensions are right now you kind of have to wonder... 

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has pardoned Daniel Perry, a man convicted of shooting a BLM rioter.

 

Daniel Perry. BBC/Reuters.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has pardoned Daniel Perry, who had been convicted of homicide after shooting a BLM rioters who was armed with an AK47. BBC. Perry was driving an Uber and took a turn where BLM was protesting. Protesters attacked his car and Garrett Foster approached as well, armed with an AK47 and was raising his rifle. Perry shot Foster five times with a .357 magnum and fled the scene, calling the cops a minute later. Perry was convicted and Governor Abbott said he would pardon him as soon as the board of Pardons and Paroles recommended it. Perry was accused of racism at the trial despite the fact that Foster was a white man. 

My Comment:

The conviction of Daniel Perry was an absolute miscarriage of justice and this pardon was long overdue. The fact that Perry was in prison for almost a year and had to deal with all kinds of legal issue just because he defended himself from a guy pointing a rifle at him is beyond an injustice. Under Texas law, he should have been acquitted under grounds of self defense. 

Why did the jury convict him? Probably because of his "racist" comments, that had almost nothing to do with the case. The comments were borderline, but given Perry shot a white person, they were irrelevant. But I am guessing they prejudiced the jury into thinking he was some kind of deranged racist or something.  

But the facts of the case showed that it was pretty obviously self defense. A reasonable person would be afraid for their life if their car was being attacked at a mob. If one of those people was armed with an AK-47 and was bringing it up to point at the you, the vast majority of people would fear for their lives. Under that standard this was a clear case of self defense. 

Keep in mind that this wasn't just Governor Abbott's decision. The board of Pardons and Paroles recommended this based on their understanding of the law. People are bashing Abbott for this but the fact is that that if the board hadn't recommended it, Abbott could not have done a thing. 

I do think that this should serve as a warning to those that would attack armed civilians. Not only will you die, there is a good chance that justice will prevail in the end and you will have died for nothing. If BLM and Antifa want to peacefully protest they can, but if they attack people they should face consequences for it. 

The sad thing about this is that had Perry been attacked in a blue state he would never get out of prison. Indeed, the main reason he was charged in the first place is because the attack happened in a blue part of a red state. Thankfully Abbott and Texas respect the rule of law and were able to pardon Perry. But in many states he would have rotted in prison for many, many years... 

Ukrainian General admits that there are no more reserves to counter Russia's offensive...

 

Wounded Ukrainian soldiers near Avdiika. New York Times.

The head of Ukraine's intelligence division, General Bundanov, has admitted that Ukraine no longer has any reserves to deploy in the fight against Russia. New York Times. Russia opened up a new front in the war near the major city of Kharkov (Kharkiv in Ukrainian) last week and has had success. General Bundanov was quoted as saying “All of our forces are either here or in Chasiv Yar,” referring to a city (Chasov Yar in Russian) in the southern front that has also come under withering Russian attack. “I’ve used everything we have. Unfortunately, we don’t have anyone else in the reserves.”. Bundanov also says that he expects Russia to open another front in the north, this time near Sumy, in the next few days or weeks. He says the Russians are trying to spread Ukrainian forces thin and divert them from the major battles in the south of the country. Russia has not deployed major forces to the Kharkov offensive but has seen great success due to a lack of Ukrainian defenses. 

My Comment:

I rarely use the New York Times as a source, both due to their obvious bias and because most of their articles are paywalled. For whatever reason I was able to read this article and I was glad I did because it paints an extremely grim picture for Ukrainian forces and their chances. 

General Bundanov was shockingly candid about the state of the Ukranian military at this point in the war. The fact that he says all of his troops are committed to to the battles of Kharkov and Chasov Yar and there are no reserves left is a pretty shocking thing to admit and one that is probably not militarily wise. My guess is that he feels free to speak to the fact because he knows the Russians know that Ukraine is on the backfoot. 

I don't think that this is Ukraine just begging for more support either, like they did in earlier stages of the war. I think it has finally sunk in that they are losing the war, from the President on down. Supposedly a lot of veteran troops are getting captured now since they have lost the will to fight. They know how bad their chances are. 

There is also the idea that Russia is mere weeks or days away from launching another major attack, this time in the Sumy region. This could be critical as that region is close to the capital, Kiev, and the attack there, if it is successful, could threaten the city. Though I doubt Russia would attack Kiev directly, they could force the government to flee and that would not only cause chaos it would also further erode the legitimacy of a regime that is already canceling elections and has a President that has a mandate that ends in mere days. 

It's possible that the Sumy operation could be another distraction attack like the one in Kharkov. Russia has not sent that many troops there and it could be another attempt to just further thin out Ukrainian forces. That's what Ukraine believes but it is possible that Sumy is the real Russian summer offensive and if that's the case things could get real bad for Ukraine real fast. 

Much of the problem is that Ukraine was supposed to have built defenses in the Kharkov region but it was largely not done due to utterly hilarious levels of corruption in the country. There were supposed to be minefields laid, bunkers built, weapons staged, but instead the Ukrainians are stuck with hand dug trenches and little else. Things might slow down as Russia starts to enter more easily defended urban areas but supposedly the small city of Vovchansk fell today, which might be evidence otherwise. 

Keep in mind that Russia is advancing on many fronts. In addition to Kharkov, there is a major battle at Chasov Yar, which, if captured, will open up a major hole in their lines. I am also hearing rumors that Robotyne, the one small city that Ukraine kind of captured during last year's Summer offensive has been captured as well. That city is clear across the country and far away from the fighting near Kharkov. If the Sumy operation is real than we should expect even more of this to continue. 

I do think that this is the beginning of the end of the Ukraine War. Though I don't know if a general collapse is going to happen in Ukraine I do think that they are unlikely to launch any further offensive operations. They are under pressure on all fronts and they no longer have any real reserves to plug any holes the Russians open up. I am guessing we will see the largest movements of the front lines since Russia abandoned the Kharkov region earlier in the war. But this time it will be the Ukrainians retreating to more defensible positions. 

The real question is if Ukraine will be able to survive that retreat. If it does the war will continue for some time but if the retreat turns into a rout we could see a quick end to the war. I genuinely hope for the 2nd outcome, this war has gone on long enough and it would be much better for the killing to end. 

My biggest fear is that NATO will do something stupid in response. Though threats to deploy troops to Ukraine have so far proven to be mostly empty (despite reports of western "mercenaries" on the ground) losing Ukraine would prove to be a major threat to the powers that be. I just worry that they will do something incredibly stupid or incredibly evil if their backs are far enough up the wall and there isn't a way for them to save face. My hope and guess is that Zelensky will be offered up as a scapegoat and will be blamed for the loss for not following Western combat doctrine and then he will be quietly or loudly disposed off... 

Biden loses Niger, Prime Minster cites US as reason relationship died.

 

Nigerien supporters with a Russian flag. The Guardian/AP.

Niger's Prime Minister Ali Mahaman Lamine Zeine cited the United States as the reason why a military pact between the two countries died. The Guardian. The Prime Mister cited the United States trying to dictate what countries Niger could have relationships with, which could refer to Russia, and a lack of support against Islamist insurgents in the country. The US stopped anti-insurgent operations after a coup removed Niger's former President. The US is now withdrawing the 1000 troops that had been stationed in the country. The troops are being replaced by ones from Russia, which has a warm relation with Niger's government and is expanding in the region. US troops and Russian troops are now stationed at the same airbase. The only good news for the United States is that Prime Minster Zeine said that his country still desired economic links. 

My Comment:

Yet another example of Joe Biden's foreign policy failing. Having good relations with Niger was a priority and they were a vital ally against Islamic extremism in the region. That is done now because Biden didn't want to be pragmatic. 

This, of course, happened because Niger had a military coup. Biden and his administration refused to recognize the new government and that ended with us having our troops kicked out of the country and Niger running into the arms of the Russians. The smart thing to have done would have tried to work with the new government and keep the relationship but when has Biden ever done the smart thing? 

And as anti-Russia as Biden claims to be, he sure is playing into their hands here. Russia has for awhile had designs on this region of Africa and now they now have a major in with Niger. Russia now has access to Niger's vast resources and it hardly cost them anything. All they have to do is have their mercenaries fight the terrorist insurgents in Niger and give the government some backing. 

This is far from the only blunder when it came to Biden's handling of Russia. Russia is now in a better position then they have been in years. They have made inroads in much of Africa, they are winning the war in Ukraine, their economy is now not dependent on the west at all, they have a de facto alliance with China (which was the #1 priority to prevent for the United States for 70 years) and all of it is due to Biden being really bad at his job. Far from hurting Russia, Biden has done more for them than even Putin has. 

Taking our troops out of the country was necessary at this point. Those troops were essentially hostages and were at the same base as the Russians. Keeping there was no longer tenable, but having them out is going to deeply hurt us in the region. The country had a major drone base that was used to gather intelligence in the region and now that is gone. The only good news is that we didn't lose any troops and that Niger at least seems open to the idea of economic links. 

Does this blunder reach the levels of Biden losing Afghanistan and bungling Ukraine? Probably not. But it is another case of Biden screwing up foreign policy. It's just a shame that foreign policy was not a bigger factor in the 2020 election. I sincerely hope that it is a huge one in 2024. Biden's policy record is a joke at this point and anyone could do a better job than he has. 

North Carolina university dumps DEI imitative and will divert the money to campus security.

 

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. USA Today/Getty.

The University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill has dumped DEI initiatives and will divert the money to campus security. USA Today. The Board of Trustees voted unanimously to transfer $2.3 million away from DEI programs and into campus policing and safety. UNC has expected to limit DEI initiatives regardless through the board of governors but the Trustees beat them too it. Chaos caused by pro-Hamas protesters was cited as a reason as well. 36 people were detained and six people were arrested at a protest that lowered the American Flag and replaced it with the Palestinian one. Trustee Marty Kotis said the DEI initiatives stood for "divisiveness, exclusion and indoctrination" as apposed to diversity equity and inclusion. 

My Comment:

DEI has been a thorn in the side for colleges and workplaces for years now. Supposedly designed to support diversity, equity and inclusion, it was a de facto discrimination scheme against white people and positive discrimination against minorities. It's also the source of a lot of culture war fodder that has damaged this country quite a bit. Getting rid of it will likely be good for everyone as people will be judged on their merit instead of the color of their skin. 

This is kind of a big deal. UNC is a major university and is the oldest public university in the United States. For them to give up on DEI is pretty huge. It sounds as they are totally defunding their DEI programs and sending all the money to campus security. 

Some of this is due to pro-Hamas protesters causing a huge mess at UNC. They basically had a riot on campus so it's understandable that they would divert money to their police department. It seems pretty obvious that the police there were not prepared for a major riot and given the fact that the war in Gaza is not going anywhere and there are likely going to be major riots if/when Trump wins in November. 

There is a it of irony of the pro-Hamas people being used as an excuse to get rid of these programs. These programs were on the way out regardless but I think it's hilarious that the excuse is because these pro-Hamas people made everyone furious with them. These are the only people that support DEI in the first place and now at UNC they are a reason why DEI is gone. 

But I think the backlash against DEI is real. People are sick of these programs and rightly consider them to be racist. They also fall afoul of the constitution and are probably going to be ruled against at the Supreme Court. UNC is getting rid of them to try and get ahead of the curve. 

This is a turning point in the culture war. In the past there was no question about getting rid of DEI. Indeed, just a few years ago this would have been unthinkable. But I think it shows that the culture is finally swinging away from the far left. Everyone is sick of having to walk on eggshells... 

Trump campaigned in deep blue New Jersey, drawing a major crowd. Should the Biden campaign be worried?

 

The Trump rally at Wildwood New Jersey. Fox News.

Trump campaigned in deep blue New Jersey and drew a massive crowd. Fox News. Between 80,000 and 100,000 people showed up to the rally in a state that has gone traditionally for Democrats. It was the largest political rally in New Jersey history. Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said that the rally shows that Biden could be in trouble in the state as he would be unable to get that many people to one of his rallies. Rally attendees said that they feel New Jersey could go red due to widespread outrage over border security and the economy. 

My Comment:

It's not surprising that Trump got 100,000 people to show up in New Jersey, Trump gets huge crowds everywhere he goes. I know the media is trying to gaslight saying that the crowd was smaller or that people left early, but they do that every time Trump speaks. The fact that New Jersey is a blue state does not matter all that much, it is still a state with a number of Republicans.

People tend to think that blue states only have Democrats but that has never been the case. In most states it's only the cities that have large numbers of Democrats while the rest of the state gets dominated by those cities. And even blue cities there are token Republicans. 

Does that mean that New Jersey is in play? It's hard to say. Three years ago the current governor, Phil Murphy, just barely won against Jack Ciattarelli, 51 to 48%. That was an off year election in a year without President Trump helping down ballot candidates. And New Jersey has had Republican governor's before, though Chris Christie was a RINO, so it is not like it's totally unimaginable that Trump could win here in a three way race against Joe Biden and RFK Jr. 

On the other hand Joe Biden got 57% of the vote in 2020 and that is a pretty big margin to make up. Though I think Biden is dramatically less popular than he was in 2020, is he seven points less in a blue state less popular? 

If New Jersey actually is in play that means that Donald Trump does not consider the swing states to be so. Is that realistic? I am not sure, I don't think that the elections in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin are going to be fair. Trump could have a 60-40 advantage in the states and still not win due to obvious and widespread voter fraud. Considering those states to be safe seems unwise. 

Of course I do respect the strategy here. If Trump campaigns in New Jersey then Biden will have to as well. Given that Trump is stuck in New York for the ridiculous show trial, it makes sense to campaign both in New Jersey and New York. The more Biden has to defend these blue states the less money and energy he will have to campaign in the actual swing states. 

Still, I think New Jersey is a long shot. If Trump does manage to win there I think we will be seeing a massive landslide for him. Is it worth it to campaign there? Probably, especially since Trump is stuck in New York anyways. I am hopefully that at least a couple of traditional blue states, like New York, New Jersey, Minnesota or Virginia could end up going for Trump. 

Russia is seeing progress in a new offensive near Kharkov

 

A bombed out building in Ukraine. NBC News/Getty.

Russia is seeing progress north of the city of Kharkov (known as Kharkiv in Ukrainian) where they have seemingly launched a new offensive. NBC News. Ukraine struggled to rush reinforcements to the region to try and stop the offensive. It is unclear if the attack is a major "red arrow" offensive to retake the city for a 2nd time or if it is meant to pull troops from Russia's other major axis of attack in the Donbass region. Russia claimed to have taken several villages and reported a breakthrough near the town of Vovchansk. Karkov has been bombed for weeks and many people thought it was a prelude to an attack in the region. 

My Comment:

The NBC News report is both a day old and very optimistic in terms of Ukraine's chances in this battle. From what I have heard from other sources it sounds as though Russia has indeed made a breakthrough near Vovchansk and that Ukraine is having a very difficult time stopping the offensive. Whatever the Russians are doing, it seems to be working as Ukraine has lost several villages. 

So is this the big summer Russian offensive that everyone was expecting? I am not sure and the fact that I am not sure is a credit to the Russians. Unlike Ukraine they don't announce their major operations before they carry them out. Doing so is a major reason why Ukraine's summer offensive was such an utter failure, it's much better to keep the enemy guessing, and that appears to be the case here. 

It is important to note that Russia is also having a lot of success near Donetsk. They have had several breakthroughs there as well and are exploiting gaps in Ukraine's lines. Could this offensive be just to further dilute Ukraine's lines and force them to retreat? It's very possible. 

But it's also possible that Kharkov is the actual objective. It's a very important city and is a major logistics and manufacturing hub and has a lot of propaganda value as well. Losing the city was an embarrassment for Russia and I am sure they want to get it back. And if they succeed in taking the city they could start to trap Ukraine in a rather massive salient if they also have success on the Donetsk front. 

I don't know how Ukraine plans to counter this attack. They don't have much in terms of reserves and will probably have to pull troops out of other locations to try and blunt this attack. Doing so will give the Russians more openings and even then it might not do much to stop the Russians. 

If there is a major breakthrough, the Russians might be wise to not overextend themselves like they did early in the war. Unless Ukraine has a general collapse, Russia should make sure that they don't get cut off from their supply lines or widen the front lines too far. That's why they lost Kharkov in the first place, though Ukraine is not anywhere near as powerful as they were back then. 

I do wonder if we are going to be in a new stage in this war. It's clear that the old World War I style trench warfare is done, largely due to Russia's dominance in the air and their KAB glide bombs. The real question is if the grinding and slow warfare we have seen for months with steady but slow Russian advances will continue, or if we might actually see some major changes in the front lines. We will have to continue to monitor the front lines and if a breakthrough happens then things will get interesting 

Benjamin Netanyahu says that Israel is willing to stand alone after Joe Biden threatens to cut off weapons for Rafah operation.

 

Massed Israeli tanks and APC's near the border with Gaza. BBC/EPA.

Benjamin Netanyahu has said that Israel is willing to stand alone after Joe Biden has threatened to cut off weapons for Israel's upcoming Rafah offensive. BBC. Netanyahu said they would keep up the fight with or without US weapons, saying they would use their "fingernails" if forced to. He also cited the Israeli war of independence which they won despite an arms embargo. The comments show how committed Israel is to winning the war. Biden has been critical of an offensive in Rafah despite the city being the heart of Hamas. Biden also claimed that US-supplied bombs have been used against civilians. 

My Comment:

As expected, Joe Biden has no influence over Israel and their policy. He wasn't able to stop their strike against Iran's embassy in Syria, he wasn't able to stop their strike against Iran proper and he wasn't able to stop the invasion of Rafah. Biden couldn't hold back his contempt of Benjamin Netanyahu and he pissed away the relationship America had with Israel. 

Not that preventing Israel from invading Rafah is a coherent policy in the first place. I don't see how you can support the war against Hamas and then think that you can't attack their headquarters for some reason. Taking the city is necessary because if the city isn't taken and the ware ends, Hamas will be able regroup, rearm and then stage another October 7th style terror attack. To hold back now would make the whole war meaningless. 

The move has obviously been done to try and quell criticism from the far left who support Hamas and are threatening to stay home in 2024. What is hilarious about that is that Biden won't get those voters in the first place, they hate him for the aid he has given Israel in the first place, cutting off some weapons is not going to change that. The smart move would be the jettison these voters as they aren't going to help you anyways and they are politically homeless.

But this move by Biden will almost certainly cost him a huge number of votes. Those voters might not go to Trump but they are not going to support a President that cut off Israel during the most important war Israel has been in for a long time. I can't believe that most Jewish voters, other than the far left nutjobs, are going to continue to support Biden. 

As for Israel, I think they will be fine on their own. They have a lot of weapons left and they should be able to destroy Hamas in Rafah without US support. US aid has not been critical and they have their own weapons production capabilities. And they can always buy weapons from other countries if it comes down to it. I know Russia has been critical of Israel lately but I am sure Putin is wise enough to realize that stepping up to supply Israel with weapons would both gain them an ally and hurt the United States in the region. Same with China or more neutral countries like India. 

With Biden though, he can't stop stepping on his own foot. This move is going to make a lot of very powerful people very angry with him and it's at a time where he can't afford to lose any voters. Recent polling shows Trump up in most traditional swing states and even in reach in solid blue states like Minnesota, New York and Washington state. I really don't understand what Biden is even doing, he's trying to please everyone but is instead making everyone mad at him. 

Plot to assassinate Ukrainian President Zelensky foiled.

 

Ukrainian soldiers arresting one of the plotters. BBC/SBU Photo.

A plot to assassinate Ukrainian President Zelensky has been foiled. BBC. The plot involved two Colonels in Zelensky's security detail who plotted to capture and kill the Ukrainian president. Other targets included the head of military intelligence and the head of the SBU, Ukraine's security service. The plot to assassinate the head of military intelligence was advanced to the point where mines and drones had been procured. The two men were arrested and charged with treason. Ukraine has blamed Russia's FSB service for the plot. 

My Comment:

This story is a few days old but for some reason western media is just covering it now. As usual, social media is way ahead of the media these days when it comes to Ukraine. The media is out to lunch, mostly covering the irrelevant Trump trial in New York and the war in Gaza and it's fallout. It's just another example of them being out of touch. 

Ukraine is saying that Russia was responsible for this but I would not be surprised if that was disinformation. There were rumors flying around that the western powers wanted to get rid of Zelensky for various reasons and right after that this plot was discovered. The west absolutely has reasons to get rid of Zelensky and also has the means to do so. 

Plus, getting rid of Zelensky is cross-purposes for Russia's desire to win the war against Ukraine. Taking out Zelensky would be like taking out Hitler in World War II. You don't kill the guy that is losing the war for you on the grounds that he might be replaced by someone competent. 

It's also possible that this incident had nothing to do with Russia or the West and was instead an organic plot made up of people that were sick of Zelensky domestically. Remember, Zelensky was supposed to be up for election but it was canceled because of the "emergency". Zelensky no longer has a mandate and people in his circle might be upset about that. 

Of course it is possible that Russia really is responsible for this plot. They have tried to kill Zelensky in the past and might want to kill him for reasons that have nothing to do with winning the war. Zelensky is responsible for several atrocities against Russia and he's a legitimate military target. Plus, Russia might not agree with me that whoever is next in line would be more competent than Zelensky. 

Russia might also want the confusion and disorder that would follow a major assassination. With Ukraine being a military dictatorship in all but name right now, taking out the President without a clear line of succession could lead to chaos, perhaps even a civil war, which Russia could obviously take advantage of.   

Regardless, Ukraine is in trouble as they are facing attacks on their leadership, regardless of who is responsible for it, at the same time they are having major problems on the battlefield. Russia is continuing to exploit the opening left by the fall of Ocheretino and it doesn't look like that will change anytime soon. Ukraine is still losing the war... 

Joe Biden speaks with Benjamin Netanyahu on the eve of a major offensive in Rafah.

 

Joe Biden and Benjamin Netanyahu. AP.

Joe Biden has spoken with Benjamin Netanyahu on the eve of a major offensive in Rafah. AP. Israel appears to be planning for a major offensive on the Hamas controlled city and Biden has said he opposes such an action. Israel ordered 100,000 civilians to leave the area and have launched a series of airstrikes. Hamas said they have accepted a cease-fire proposal though Israel has signaled they won't accept the deal. Netanyahu has vowed that he would go it alone in Rafah if necessary and notes that Hamas still has over 100 hostages. 

My Comment:

Biden does not have much influence over Israel and Netanyahu. If Israel wants to go to Rafah they will go to Rafah and whatever little pressure Biden can bring on Israel will not be enough to stop them. Biden angered Netanyahu years ago and he can't really do anything to stop Netanyahu. 

Besides, not going into Rafah would not make any sense. Indeed, not going into Rafah and destroying what is left of Hamas would pretty much undermine the entire cause of the war. Not doing so would just allow Hamas to regroup and rearm and could lead to another October 7th style attack a few years down the line. It would make no sense for Israel to not neutralize Hamas once and for all. 

That's why I doubt much will come from Hamas accepting the cease fire. Israel has nothing to gain for allowing Hamas a chance to avoid destruction, so I would be utterly shocked if Israel goes along with it. I doubt they would even get any credit for it among their critics since they hate Israel no matter what they do. 

As for the battle itself, I do think it will be a bloody affair. Urban combat is always tough and that goes double when the enemy is fanatical and is more than willing to allow civilians to act as human shields. There are going to be heavy casualties on both sides, probably more than we have seen on either side of the war before. 

That's about the only reason I could think of for Israel taking a deal. Israel hasn't taken a huge amount of casualties but they could in a battle with Rafah. And Hamas isn't the only side that needs to rest and rearm. If a deal happens it will be because of that, not because of Joe Biden or the actions of protesters. 

As for Biden, he's kind of screwed no matter what. He can't really do anything to stop Israel and he also can't do much to appease the far left protesters that are against him. Even if Biden were to somehow end the war, they would not give him any credit for it. But with a major battle in Rafah very likely, Biden is going to come even harsher criticism from the pro-Hamas faction of his party... 

Who is funding the pro-Hamas campus protests? Biden donors...

 

Pro-Hamas protesters at Washburn University. Politico/AP. 

Some of Joe Biden's biggest donors are funding the pro-Hamas campus protest movement. Politico. The two biggest groups funding the protests are Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow, both of which are getting funds from the Tides Foundation. The Tides Foundation is supported by George Soros, David Rockefeller Jr. and Susan and Nick Pritzker, all major donors to Biden and the Democrats. The donations appear to be cross purpose as the youth movement has damaged Joe Biden and the Democrats. Those protesters funded by these organizations have dubbed Biden as "Genocide Joe" after the supposed genocide in Gaza. Other donors to these organizations are questioning the donations as they do not want to assist pro-Hamas protesters. 

My Comment:

Wow, the media is also working cross purposes when it comes to Biden and the pro-Hamas protesters. When conservative pundits pointed out that George Soros was funding these protests, it was denounced as anti-Semitism, despite Soros funding an anti-Semitic protest. It was idiotic but now the media is admitting it as truth. 

It was pretty obvious that these protests were not organic and that someone was funding it. The biggest hint was the fact that all the tents and flags at Columbia were all the same and brand new. If the protests were truly organic the protesters would be using whatever they had on hand, not the exact same things as everyone else. It was clear that someone was funding it and it turns out it was these billionaires, with George Soros front and center. 

The question is why. For the students there, they have been mislead by TikTok, social media and their professors to paint Israel as the bad guys, but the billionaires? They absolutely know better. There is no Genocide in Gaza and they know it. So why are they pushing the lie so hard that they are hurting Biden's chances in 2024?

I'm of two minds of it. My first thought is that this is just a dress rehearsal for the 2024 election. Everyone thinks that Donald Trump is going to win in 2024. Barring some kind of disaster or massive voter fraud, Trump should win easily, given how terrible Biden's policies and behaviors are being received. If Trump wins I expect there to be huge protests from the far left and if that's the case these current protests are there to both organize and recruit in anticipation for the inauguration. 

My other thought is that this is a push against Biden so he will go even further left than he already is. In a sane world, Biden would be screaming towards centrism considering his polling. People are sick of the far left and want either right wing or centrist policies but the billionaires do not. By launching these protests, they are pushing Biden to stay to the left as he has to be aware that he needs the youth vote that they have brainwashed into thinking Israel is the bad guy. 

The funny thing is both of those things could be true at the same time. These billionaires have a lot of enemies and could consider both Biden and Trump to be their enemies. They probably prefer Biden but are also fine with punishing him to the point that Trump wins if they manage to take over the Democrat's party. 

Regardless, I do think that these folks should be punished for what they are doing to this country. I am fine with free speech but many of these protests are illegal and funding them is a crime, and the same folks responsible for the campus pro-Hamas riots are responsible for the BLM riots that devastated the country in 2020. Hopefully if/when Trump wins he will take a serious look at arresting these folks and putting a stop to the funding of these protest movements. 

Joe Biden finally breaks silence on pro-Hamas protests across the country...

 

Pro-Hamas protesters scream at a NYPD officer at Columbia. AP. 

Joe Biden has finally broken his silence on pro-Hamas campus protests across the country. AP. Biden had come under withering criticism from Donald Trump and others for not addressing the protests that have devolved into riots at campuses like UCLA and Columbia. Biden said that he supported free speech but that order must prevail and condemned violence. Biden also bluntly rejected the protesters demands, saying "no" when asked if it would change his Israel policy. Biden also condemned anti-Semitism. His remarks were criticized by pro-Hamas factions in his own party.

My Comment:

These protests have been going on for two weeks now and Biden was silent for two weeks. Now that they are finally being broken up, he's finally speaking up? Talk about being too little too late. Had he spoken out earlier and more forcibly perhaps we could have avoided some of the damage caused by these protests and riots. 

 And the idea that Joe Biden defends free speech is laughable. He's currently prosecuting people for having done nothing wrong other than questioning the results of a very suspicious election. He's speaking out of two sides of his mouth on this issue and I don't think anyone is buying it anymore. 

As for the protesters it seems clear that they have failed in their goals. Biden was not moved at all in his Israel position, as bizarre and unpredictable as it is. Biden is still trying to please both sides of the issue but it's also clear that he is not going to give into the demands of these protesters. Not like their protests were going to change anyone's minds regardless but it's clear that both Israel and Biden will do what they want and a bunch of spoiled college kids will not change a thing. 

The problem is that Republicans keep getting in their own way on this issue. Having the left eating each other is a good thing and other than pressuring Biden to put his own foot in his mouth, they should have done nothing. Instead they passed an anti-Semitism bill that is so overbroad that it would ban parts of the New Testament of the Bible, specifically the part where Jews allowed Jesus to be crucified. The law, which is also a huge violation of free speech, brought Republicans into what had been a intra-Democrat war. 

The goals of this protest seem unclear. I don't believe they are organic, the war has been going on for months now and the protests seem to be absurdly well funded. And if their goal was to change policy it seems like it an absolute failure given that both Israel and Biden have told them to pound sand. 

Part of me thinks that this is just a push against the ruling faction of the Democratic Party so that the far-left progressives can take over. The campus protesters and Muslims are just useful idiots for that powerplay. That is sort of what happened during the Black Lives Matter riots, it pushed the Democrats far to the left, though the progressives were unable to completely take over the party. 

But part of me also thinks that this is just a dress rehearsal for the 2024 election and election aftermath. It's likely that Donald Trump will win again in 2024 and if that happens I think there are going to be riots and chaos funded and executed by the same people that are throwing these campus protests. These current protests are for intel gathering and recruitment and probably have very little to do with policy. 

As for anti-Semitism, I do think that it is getting worse in this country. I don't think that these protests have much to do with Israel at all, but is in fact about Jews and hating them. I also think it has less to do with the way far-right people hate Jews (because they are disproportionately leftists) but because they consider Jews to be White and these folks are nothing if not racist against Whites. 

Controversial US military pier to be used to deliver aid to Gaza almost complete.

 

The dock nearing completion. Politico/US Army photo.

A controversial US military pier to be used to deliver aid to Gaza is almost complete. Politico. The pier might be up and operational as soon as this weekend, barring any delays due to logistics or weather. The pier would allow aid to be delivered to Gaza without Israel opening borders. The pier is controversial as it would involve US troops in Gaza directly and could lead to US troops coming under hostile fire from Gaza or collateral damage from Israeli airstrikes. Though troops will not land in Gaza they will be stationed just off shore, with as many as 1000 troops from the Army and Navy deployed. The pier would allow to dramatically increase the amount of aid delivered to Gaza. 

My Comment:

Before I say anything else, this is an engineering marvel and it's honestly impressive that the US military was able to design and deploy this thing so fast. I didn't think we were capable of such acts of engineering anymore. Regardless of what you think of this deployment, this is a real victory for American logistics. 

With that out of the way, this is a horrible idea. First of all, I don't think Gaza should be getting any aid whatsoever. These folks are our enemies and the people of Gaza largely support Hamas and their actions on October 7th. The idea that we should give them anything is offensive. And all it will do is prolong the war as the more aid Hamas has the longer they can hold out. 

It is also going to put our troops at risk. Gaza is, of course, a war zone and it's very possible that this dock will come under attack, either on purpose or by accident. Neither side in this conflict is well known for fire discipline and I wouldn't be surprised if Hamas was so stupid to attack humanitarian aid that is actively helping them. They are radical Muslims and they hate the west almost as much as they hate the Jews, so I would honestly be surprised if this pier didn't come under attack. 

That might even be the point. Having troops come under attack in Gaza could give Biden some cover. He's getting torched by the far left for his support of Israel and having troops come under attack could solve that issue at least a little bit. It might also allow him to join the war on Israel's side. The fact that both of those options are cross purpose isn't a mistake, Biden's Israel policy is schizophrenic at this point, there is no rhyme or reason as to what Biden does in any situation. 

Indeed, this whole scheme is an example of Biden not being able to make an actual decision on what to do about this war. A sane leader would find a way to either pressure Israel into allowing aid to cross the borders or not provide aid at all. What Biden is doing here is trying to do neither but has the added bonus of putting our troops at risk. It makes no sense whatsoever, regardless of your opinion of the war in Gaza.

The funny thing is that Biden isn't going to get any favor from the far left over this. They won't settle for anything less than the total destruction of Israel, providing a little bit of aid isn't going to do a thing to convince them to vote for Biden. Indeed, I don't think anything he does will change their minds, Biden is "genocide Joe" to them now...