Exploding pagers in Lebanon deals severe blow to Hezbollah.

 

A car that was damaged in the attack. AP. 

Exploding pagers in Lebanon have dealt a severe blow to Hezbollah. AP. At least nine people have died, including an 8 year old girl, and thousands have been injured after thousands of pagers exploded at the same time across Lebanon and Syria. The pagers had been sabotaged with explosives and were set off by a signal. Hezbollah had ordered their members to switch from cell phones to pagers to avoid intelligence gathering from Israel. The attack was extremely complicated and involved exploiting the supply chain. Though Israel has not taken credit for the attack, Hezbollah and Lebanon have blamed Israel for the attack. Hezbollah has vowed retaliation for the attack. Iran's ambassador to Lebanon was also injured in the attack. 

My Comment:

This was a very important and devastating attack in Lebanon and one that will probably draw blowback. Thousands of people were injured and it's amazing that more people weren't killed. Given how devastating this blow was I am guessing that Hezbollah will be forced to respond. 

The attack is honestly incredibly impressive. Israel saw an opportunity and took it. They had to get these pagers into the supply line and they sent them across both Lebanon and Syria. The attack didn't kill many people but it did injure thousands of people, many of them members of Hezbollah. This kind of thing is mostly unprecedented and we haven't really seen anything like this before. 

I do worry that many of the people killed in this attack had nothing to do with Hezbollah. The charges in these pagers were not super powerful but they were big enough that someone standing next someone with it could have been injured or even killed as well. The one video I saw (which I won't post here) had a guy shopping in a market and it looked like the guy next to him, which could have just been some random guy, got hurt too. And were these pagers sold to the general public? Hezbollah were the main targets but they aren't the only people that could be using pagers. I don't know what the culture is in Lebanon, but I know pagers are popular with doctors here in the USA, so perhaps something similar happened here?

The problem with this is  that there is absolutely going to be blow back. Hezbollah has been damaged but not defeated and I am guessing they might even start a war with Israel after this. They would almost have to, they lost a lot of face by falling for this attack. 

This does seem like the kind of thing that is only going to work once. People across the world now will be checking their electronics for explosives. I don't think Israel will be able to do this again and I don't really think anyone else will try. 

The side benefit for this attack is that Hezbollah (and other Israeli adversaries in the region) are not going to be able to trust their communications devices. I am sure they will find a workaround eventually, but that is probably going to be cell phones and those can be monitored. I don't think they can move back to pagers after this... 

Putin orders Russia to increase their number of soldiers by 180,000.

 

Vladimir Putin. AP.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered an increase of the size of the military by 180,000 active duty troops. AP. Once the troops are mobilized and trained the number of active troops in Russia will be 1.5 million. Counting reserve forces, but not paramilitary forces, the total number of troops Russia will have will be 2.4 million, making them one of the largest militaries in the world. Russia uses both conscripts and volunteers in their military but in Ukraine most troops being used are volunteers, due to resistance for using conscripts in the war. Putin said that 700,000 troops were serving in the Ukraine conflict as of June.

My Comment:

A somewhat ominous story that could bode poorly for the state of the world. Russia clearly thinks they need more soldiers than they currently have but the question is why? Is it really because of Ukraine or are they worried about a wider conflict. 

Troop numbers have always been a problem for Russia in Ukraine. Indeed, much of the difficulty they have had in this war is because they didn't bring anywhere near as many troops as they needed. Russia only send 200,000 troops to fight in the initial phase of the war, and they split them up. They did pretty well considering but it isn't surprising they had to pull back from the Kiev front. 

I don't think that the issue is the Kursk incursion, which is currently being retaken. The problem Russia has is that they can't use their conscripts in Ukraine due to the law. However, Russia can absolutely use and is using, conscripts in the Kursk area. Those troops are directly defending Russian territory so they don't have a shortage of troops that can fight there. There were few troops deployed in the area when the attacked happened. 

Does Russia need more troops in Ukraine itself? Probably. They still are outnumbered by Ukraine's depleted and damaged forces. If they had more they could probably advance even quicker than they already are. Having a larger force would help if the Ukrainians manage to launch another offensive like they are rumored to be thinking, insanely enough. Plus it would help to be able to rotate troops out so they could rest and rearm. But it's not like they don't have enough troops now. They could always use more but 180,000 troops aren't going to matter that much. 

But I think this has less to do with Ukraine and more to do with NATO and the United States. Russia issued a warning last week that allowing Ukraine to use long-range precision missiles would be a casus belli for war against NATO, since only NATO troops can operate those weapons. It's very possible that Russia is not bluffing there and they want to build up their own forces just in case the Biden administration is dumb enough to approve the use of those long range weapons. 

The one thing I do know is that I doubt Russia will have any trouble getting volunteers for this force. The Russian military pays pretty well and there is a genuine wave of patriotism. Indeed, it's another reason why Ukraine's Kursk offensive was ill advised to say the least, Russians can rightly claim that their country is under attack and will be willing to defend it...

A 2nd assassin has made an attempt at Donald Trump's life.

 

Donald Trump arriving in Las Vegas this weekend. AP. 

A 2nd assassin has made an attempt on Donald Trump's life, this time at his gulf club in West Palm Beach Florida. AP. The former President was golfing and the assassin, identified as Ryan Wesley Routh, had a scoped rifle, supposedly an AK variant, and a GoPro video camera. The Secret Service saw a rifle poking through a fence line and fired at the assassin, driving him away. He was picked up in a neighboring county after a good Samaritan identified his vehicle. This is, obviously, the 2nd major attempt on Trump's life, with the first one coming in Pennsylvania where Trump had his ear grazed. It is unclear what the motivation for the attack was. The suspect was captured alive. 

The following news outlets have live updates pertaining to this story.

Associated Press

USA Today

BBC

Breitbart

The Guardian

As this is a breaking news story and as such, news will likely change quickly. Check the linked live updates for the latest news.

My Comment:

I don't think too many people are surprised with this, after the shooting in Pennsylvania, which Trump barely survived, I think everyone expected that someone would attempt this again. Given the huge threats against Trump both domestically and internationally, it was only a matter of time before it happened again. 

Thankfully the Secret Service was able to stop it this time. They were able to engage with the shooter before he even got a shot off. It doesn't reflect well that he was able to jump into an SUV and get away from the scene of the crime. I also think that if the shooter had been smart enough to not poke his rifle through the fenceline, he might have been undetected when Trump got into range. Thankfully, he was an idiot and the Secret Service was able to stop him. 

As for the attacker, it is good that he was taken alive. This time we should be able to determine his motive a lot easier and it will be harder for the powers that be to actually cover it up. Indeed, there are reports that this is the shooters X/Twitter account, though that hasn't been verified. If it is legit then it's clear that it was Trump's Ukraine policy that he was upset with, but time will tell if that was just an unfortunate person that both looks like the assassin and has the same name. 

Either way we are in unprecedented times. This is the 2nd attack in less than a season on the leading presidential candidate that has a very good chance of winning. It seems clear that Trump might not make it to election day. And if Trump does get killed? I think we end up in the American version of the troubles, with tit for tat attacks targeting politicians, celebrities, or perhaps ordinary civilians on both sides. 

Without knowing the motivations for the shooter it's unclear who should bear the blame for this attack. What is clear is that the rhetoric around Donald Trump is out of control. The Democrats talk about Trump in apocalyptic terms, saying that he is a threat to democracy and that if he gets in there will be no further elections, and other such nonsense. The truth of the matter is that Trump was a fairly moderate president with fairly moderate policies and would certainly be a lot less dangerous than a Harris administration, but even then there is nothing that would justify violence in the 2024 election. But if Trump gets killed, then pretty much everything is on the table. 

Finally, I honestly don't know how much more of this I can take. The country is a very dark place right now and it's hard to keep up with all the violence and threats. This has been, by far, the craziest presidential season I have ever seen. Between the 1st assassination attempt, the lawfare against Trump, Biden collapsing and then dropping out, the anointment of Kamala Harris and now the 2nd assassination, is it any wonder that I just want this all to be over with? 

Donald Trump says he will end taxes on overtime pay if elected president.

 

Donald J. Trump. 

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announced today plans to end taxes on overtime pay if elected president. The Hill. Hourly employees would only have to pay taxes on 40 hours of work and anything after that would be payroll tax free. Congress would have to approve the measure but a bill was introduced in Congress earlier this year. Trump has also campaigned on ending taxes on tips, a proposal that Democratic candidate Kamala Harris stole, while he has also proposed ending taxes on social security payments as well. 

My Comment:

As an hourly worker this would be huge for me. In 2023 I had about 300 hours of overtime and if I could have gotten all that money tax free it would have been great. It would have also kept me in a lower tax bracket, though, to be fair, very little of my income was taxed at the next level. Getting more money on my paycheck each week (and yes, I usually have a few hours of OT on each biweekly paystub) would be amazing. 

This should be popular among both workers and businesses. Workers are obviously going to like getting paid a lot more for having to work more than 40 hours a week. But this is a big win for businesses as well. After all, I can't tell you how many times I have heard people saying it's not really worth it to work OT because the "government takes it all" anyways. That's not strictly accurate, but getting rid of the taxes would incentivize taking overtime shifts, which makes things easier for managers. 

Will the proposal pass? It's possible. I think Republicans can get on board with this proposal and the GOP should have enough votes in the house and senate to pass the bill. There might be a few hurdles with deficit hawks who will be upset about the loss of tax revenue but I also think that more than a few Democrats would be willing to vote for this as well. 

And I don't think the lost income will be that extreme, largely because these tax decreases will be coupled with tariffs on foreign goods. Those tariffs should be able to raise enough funds to more than cover this proposal and the no taxes on tips one. Though I don't know if it would counter the no taxes on social security (which is not a proposal I expect congress to pass). And since Trump's tariffs were deflationary in nature it might help with that issue as well. 

The other problem is that Kamala Harris is likely to steal this idea and pass it off as her own, like she did with no taxes on tips. I don't think Harris has any inclination to actually pass either tax break but she will probably desperately want to get rid of a winning issue for Trump. And since that seemed to have worked on the tip tax, which wasn't mentioned in the debate once as far as I remember, it could happen again. 

Regardless, I think this is another example of the new Republican party being more "progressive" and pro-worker than the Democrats. The Democrats make a lot of noise about being pro-worker but then they import competition from other countries and cause inflation. This would at least help me as a worker more than anything the Democrats have come up with this election cycle. I'm all in on Trump anyways, but if I wasn't I would probably vote for him now just out of naked self interest. 

Donald Trump leads nationally in new New York Times/Siena poll.

 

Donald Trump. Fox News.

A new poll shows Donald Trump leading Kamala Harris nationally in a New York Times/Siena college poll. Fox News. Trump beats the vice president by one point in the poll, in a 48 to 47% lead. The polling was similar to the last time this poll was taken in July, right after Joe Biden dropped out of the race. Trump had seen a dip in support after Kamala Harris entered the race but that did not show up in this poll. Harris did manage to claw back some support from traditional pro-Democrat demographics compared to Joe Biden but is well behind what other Democrats have gotten in previous years. Harris should also be concerned about 60% of voters wanting change and only 25% of those voters saying Harris would accomplish that, compared to 53% for Trump. The only good news for Harris in the poll is that Democrats hold an enthusiasm lead over Republicans at 91% compared to 85%. 

The New York Times poll can be found here (paywalled).  

My Comment:

This is fairly devastating for Kamala Harris. For the record in 2020 this poll showed Joe Biden 8 points ahead and was off about four points in terms of national vote total. Biden barely won with those margins so to see this for Harris is very bad news for her indeed. 

The best case scenario for Harris is that the errors in the polling are corrected and this is basically accurate. But I don't see how she could possibly win if she is a point behind in the national vote. Republicans have an advantage in the Electoral College and a national lead means that Harris does not have a path unless something in the electorate has changed massively. 

But if the poll has the same error in 2024 as it had in 2020? Then Harris is done. Completely. It would mean that Trump is up by five points nationally, which means not only is a victory ensured it means that Trump could start seeing the kinds of scenarios we were envisioning before Joe Biden dropped out. Blue states like New Jersey, Minnesota and New Mexico could flip red too, along with more traditional swing states that have trended blue, like New Hampshire and Virginia. 

Of course this is just one poll, but it is in line with many others that show that the summer of vibes for Harris are at an end. Other polls show her still in the lead but doing much worse than she was after entering the race while the betting markets and Nate Silver's model are giving Trump an advantage. Silver's model has Trump at a 62% chance of winning. And keep in mind that the New York Times/Siena poll is one that is considered reliable. 

So why has this happened? I think some of it generally was the polling companies giving Harris a few points for free to try and build momentum for her and that had to end at this point at the race if they want to keep any credibility in the future. Under this model the Harris vibes were never real and I am guessing that is a major factor. 

But events have a lot to do with it as well. I think the RFK Jr. endorsement was huge as he was drawing more from Trump than Harris and he is bringing his substantial ground game on board as well. He also brought a lot of folks on board that were angry with Trump over the covid vaccines, but those people will be satisfied now as RFK Jr. looks to be involved in the campaign. Meanwhile the best endorsements the Harris camp can get are Dick and Liz Cheney, folks that were persona non grata among Republicans anyways and may even turn off a few Democrat voters who thought Dick Cheney was the devil during Bush's term. 

Some of it too is the fact that Harris actually had to be seen in public. She had her convention speech and a disastrous interview on CNN and those served to remind Americans that she isn't a good speaker and they never liked her all that much. 

Of course this is all leading to the debate this week. That debate could prove critical given that Trump is a decent debater and Harris is not. Harris had to drop out of the 2020 race due to her poor debate performance and the fact Tulsi Gabbard had her number. Gabbard is now assisting Trump which should give him an even larger advantage than he already has. Keep in mind Trump was able to destroy the political careers of Jeb Bush, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden during his debates with them and all of them were more competent at it then Harris is. 

On the other hand Harris is the benefactor of low expectations, I don't think anyone outside of the most rabid Democratic partisans believe that Harris has a chance of victory against Trump. If she manages to hold her own it could be a victory for her. But is it already too late? 

Vladimir Putin "endorses" Kamala Harris, but does he actually want her to win?

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Fox News/Reuters.

Vladimir Putin appeared to endorse Kamala Harris at an economic event. Fox News. Putin said that it was up to the American people to decide but said that Joe Biden supported Harris so Russia would as well. Putin also joked about her laughter saying that it means everything is fine with her. Biden had previously endorsed Joe Biden saying that he was more predictable than Donald Trump. It's unclear how genuine Putin's statements were though he did note that Trump had sanctioned Russia more than any other American president. However, the intel community says that Russia is trying to get Trump elected. And unlike Harris, both Trump and his VP candidate JD Vance have been skeptical of funding the war in Ukraine. 

She laughs so expressively and infectiously. Russian President Vladimir Putin has made a surprising endorsement for who he wants to win the 2024 US election. #USpresident #vladimirputin #russianpresid pic.twitter.com/2lsorHmkED

— Hawk Insight (@hawk_insight) September 6, 2024

My Comment:

It seems pretty clear that President Putin is making fun of our politics here in the United States. Given that he's heard Kamala Harris laugh and is a sane rational person, there is no way that he would actually complement her for that. And given his bemused expression and cadence in the video above it's clear he was having fun with the American media which either took his statement literally, on the right, or condemned it totally, on the left.  

It's unclear what Putin is really thinking though. There's an argument to be made for both candidates in terms of what benefits Russia the most. The pro-Kamala side is pretty obvious. She's incompetent and will double down on the failed policies of the Biden administration. Those policies have helped the Russian economy, greatly damaged the rest of Europe and is gradually pushing more support for Putin from the third world. Indeed, Russia and China are in a de facto alliance now because of Biden and it's clear that Harris will just be more of the same. 

The pro-Trump side is sort of obvious as well. Trump and Vance want an end to the war in Ukraine and will make it a priority to end the war. Trump also has a decent relationship with Russia and would at least be willing to meet with Putin to try and sort the relationship out. 

But I do see a major problem for Putin if Trump does get elected. That desire to end the war means that there will be a big diplomatic push to end the war. And given that Trump is a skilled negotiator that means that Putin may have to give up some of his war aims in Ukraine. With Harris there won't actually be a diplomatic push and instead they would continue the status quo which means that there is a good chance Ukraine collapses and Putin wins everything. 

Regardless though I think what Putin really wants is chaos in the United States. His statements here, along with the nonsense that happened this week with Tenent media. After all, Putin had his goons make a few Facebook posts back in 2016 and it hampered all of Trump's 1st term and still causes division today. By fanning the flames here again, he's trying to make it so that both sides believe that the other candidate is inauthentic. 

Of course none of this would work if it wasn't for the fact that the Democrats allow it to. The fact is that most countries try to interfere with our elections. Iran is doing the same thing and we know that China and Israel do so regularly as well. But somehow Russia captured the imagination of the Democrats and they made a few Facebook posts in 2016 the biggest story in the world... 

Russia is advancing to Pokrovsk and could take the city soon, which would threaten to collapse the front.

 

An Ukrainian artillery unit firing on Russians near Pokrovsk last month. UnHeard/Getty.

Russia is advancing rapidly to the critical city of Pokrovsk and if they take the city it could cause a collapse of Ukrainian troops in the Donbas region. UnHeard. The war in Ukraine was long stuck in an attritional warfare stage but has evolved now to rapid advances for the Russians. They are now advancing close to the city of Pokrovsk, which is a major transportation hub in the region. Taking the city would prevent their efforts to supply and reinforce their troops in Donbass. The rapid advances underscore the failure of the Kursk offensive, which took limited territory in Russia but exhausted Ukraine's reserves. If Pokrovsk falls there would be no major obstacles for Russia until they hit the Dnieper River, especially if the Ukrainian military collapses.  

My Comment:

It's clear that the war in Ukraine has entered a new phase. For a long time the war was one of attrition with only minor gains on either side. It was grinding warfare with heavy casualties on both sides but only rare gains of territory. 

That has obviously changed now. Russia has taken quite a bit of territory in the last few months and is advancing rapidly on multiple fronts. And Ukraine launched a major attack of their own in the Kursk region. After a long stalemate the front lines are moving again. 

I do think that the Kursk offensive essentially lost the war for Ukraine. They were losing regardless, but the fact that they launched a rather pointless offensive into Russia itself will advance the failure. That offensive sent their best troops to a strategically unimportant area of Russia and those units are getting mauled. They would have much better served as a reserve force that could have been rushed to the area around Pokrovsk. This could have delayed Russia's offensive, perhaps to the point where winter would set in and slow both sides due to "mud season". 

But now? Ukraine is pretty much screwed. Russia has penetrated Ukraine's main defensive lines and there isn't much standing in the way of the Russians and Pokrovsk. I don't think they are going to be able to stop it and once it happens Ukraine is going to be cut off. Taking the city would cut off a major salient to the southeast of the city and would threaten to do the same thing to the north if Russia manages to advance in Chasiv Yar. Both salient could turn into major cauldrons if the the front lines don't collapse immediately. 

If they do collapse? Then Russia could advance all the way to the Dnieper River and many Ukrainian units could be cut off completely. It wouldn't be the end of the war, not by a long shot, but it would be a massive blow to the Ukrainians. And it might cause Ukraine to pull troops from other fronts and allow the Russians to advance there as well. 

With that being said Ukraine is said to be building up forces near the Zaporizhzhia front. It's possible that they are going to launch another attack there, which would be insanity. But I have said for awhile now that they are obsessed with causing a nuclear incident and capturing the nuclear power plant there could cause that. Regardless, those forces would be better served in the Donbas region. 

What can Ukraine do to stop this? Not much. They didn't have much in reserve before the Kursk offensive. They could pull troops from the border with Belarus but the military build up there is going to make that a very risky proposition. I still don't think the Belarusians will join the war, but they could and that greatly limits Ukraine's options. I really don't think that Ukraine can fix the situation in Donbass and the best move would probably be to withdraw now while they still can...