• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Czech_pivo said:
Have to wonder if the Sunni's in Iraq might feel embolden to take a chance and smack some Shia Iraqi's since big Shia brother Iran is getting the shit kicked out of it.

On another note, any idea how Russia will be able to fly in troops/supplies to its remaining bases in Syria if a new regime in Iran denies them entry into Iranian airspace?
Click to expand...
Turkey.....
 
In a related note, the Polymarket 'prediction market trading' (which seems like a veneer for actual gambling) saw a $529M trade on the timing of the Iran bombing, with similar trades happening around Venezuala and other US attacks.

Seems a hell of a lot like insider trading, with indivudual directly profitting from this, and greasy AF. Sure it's completely coincidental that Donald Trump Jr is on their advisory board.

This is insane, and also seems like another breach of OPSEC like the pizza orders that targets could monitor as an early warning to prepare themselves.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/poly...g18kLrfmbAuIgRcQrMnoqNh05K0q-Yjcp4mzytpQlRbzp
 
Navy_Pete said:
This is insane, and also seems like another breach of OPSEC like the pizza orders that targets could monitor as an early warning to prepare themselves.
Click to expand...
What would be the point of worrying about OPSEC for indicators of "something is going to happen there" if a major political aim is to properly restore Congress's role in the decision to authorize war? The US can either try for the former or just give up and go with the latter; there is mitigation for the latter if it's done well before any operations are in contemplation and that would also apply some diplomatic leverage. (Against the Iranian regime, Congress could have authorized a blank cheque as far back as 1979.)

There will still be the necessity of OPSEC for "what exactly is going to happen", and judging by some domestic political reactions, going through Congress risks some of that, too. I suppose the US would have to eat leaks for at least one operation, but if the administration came down brutally hard on leakers and used every possible legal theory to chase anyone promulgating leaks (including journalists, if there are suitable provisions in law), that might mitigate the risk for future operations.

Being against war (eg. pure anti-war), being against unauthorized war (eg. constitutionalists), and being against what the US is trying to do are three different positions I'm seeing people stake out, sometimes in different mixes (eg. anti-war or constitutionalist, but pro-regime change). The people whose positions amount to defending the Iranian regime are in the least desirable position, and while there may not be many, they are loud.

[Add: at some point, someone is going to find a budget to place bogus bets or buy a bunch of pizza just to make people think something is about to happen in a lead up to some kind of negotiations...]
 
The Bread Guy said:
Meanwhile, with the 250th anniversary coming up, a bit of U.S. history via the DoW info-machine.
"Harsh Treatment of Colonists Leads to American Revolutionary War"
"Battle of Yorktown Leads to Treaty With Great Britain"
Click to expand...

I was always fascinated by the key role France played in the US victory, which tends to get downplayed by the "Murrica!" crowd.

And, ironically, French support of the US helped establish the conditions that contributed to its own decline including kicking off their own revolution, as well as helping to establish Canada in its present form through the need to abandon New France to its fate. ;)


France's direct help was a major and decisive contribution towards the United States' eventual victory and independence in the war. However, as a cost of participation in the war, France accumulated over 1 billion livres in debt, which significantly strained the nation's finances. The French government's failure to control spending (in combination with other factors) led to unrest in the nation, which eventually culminated in a revolution a few years after the conflict between the US and Great Britain concluded. Relations between France and the United States thereafter deteriorated, leading to the Quasi-War in 1798.

en.wikipedia.org

France in the American Revolutionary War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
PrairieFella said:
3 more of the same 3? Paywall.
Click to expand...
Pentagon says three F-15s downed by friendly fire in Kuwait, no casualties

Three American F-15 fighter jets crashed Monday morning over Kuwait in an “apparent friendly fire” incident, U.S. Central Command said in a statement. All six crew members ejected safely and are in stable condition.
“The U.S. Air Force fighter jets were mistakenly shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses,” Central Command said. Military officials said the three jets were in engaged active combat at the time of the incident, involving attacks from Iranian aircraft, ballistic missiles and drones.
U.S. military officials confirmed they were coordinating with Kuwaiti defense forces as they investigated the incident.
Earlier Monday, Kuwait said that it was coordinating with U.S. counterparts to investigate a crash of several aircraft and that authorities had initiated an immediate search-and-rescue operation, evacuating the crews and transporting them for medical care.
 
Nvlgzr said:
Pentagon says three F-15s downed by friendly fire in Kuwait, no casualties

Three American F-15 fighter jets crashed Monday morning over Kuwait in an “apparent friendly fire” incident, U.S. Central Command said in a statement. All six crew members ejected safely and are in stable condition.
“The U.S. Air Force fighter jets were mistakenly shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses,” Central Command said. Military officials said the three jets were in engaged active combat at the time of the incident, involving attacks from Iranian aircraft, ballistic missiles and drones.
U.S. military officials confirmed they were coordinating with Kuwaiti defense forces as they investigated the incident.
Earlier Monday, Kuwait said that it was coordinating with U.S. counterparts to investigate a crash of several aircraft and that authorities had initiated an immediate search-and-rescue operation, evacuating the crews and transporting them for medical care.
Click to expand...

In other news, Kuwaiti Air Defence Team receives efficiency medal and an invite to Ukraine ;)
 
Brad Sallows said:
What would be the point of worrying about OPSEC for indicators of "something is going to happen there" if a major political aim is to properly restore Congress's role in the decision to authorize war? The US can either try for the former or just give up and go with the latter; there is mitigation for the latter if it's done well before any operations are in contemplation and that would also apply some diplomatic leverage. (Against the Iranian regime, Congress could have authorized a blank cheque as far back as 1979.)

There will still be the necessity of OPSEC for "what exactly is going to happen", and judging by some domestic political reactions, going through Congress risks some of that, too. I suppose the US would have to eat leaks for at least one operation, but if the administration came down brutally hard on leakers and used every possible legal theory to chase anyone promulgating leaks (including journalists, if there are suitable provisions in law), that might mitigate the risk for future operations.

Being against war (eg. pure anti-war), being against unauthorized war (eg. constitutionalists), and being against what the US is trying to do are three different positions I'm seeing people stake out, sometimes in different mixes (eg. anti-war or constitutionalist, but pro-regime change). The people whose positions amount to defending the Iranian regime are in the least desirable position, and while there may not be many, they are loud.

[Add: at some point, someone is going to find a budget to place bogus bets or buy a bunch of pizza just to make people think something is about to happen in a lead up to some kind of negotiations...]
Click to expand...
If you can't see the issue with personnel profitting hugely in a rigged crypto gambling site from inside knowledge about impending strikes. while also giving clear indication into the public sphere that something is actually going to happen (vice just a bluff) I'm not sure what else to say.

Do you think knowing that strikes are coming days out based on crypto trading bets is maybe a problem that gives a regime you want to 'shock and awe' time to mobilize a bit and get things in play? Iran probably missed it, but you can bet that will be another open source intel fact people are watching in the future.

These are the same clowns that shared secret plans on Signal with a journalist, and left SCI top secret plans in a golf course so I guess in comparison this is small potatoes.

But cmon, people collectively made $529M based on knowledge of high level operational plans, that's pretty corrupt.
 
Navy_Pete said:
In a related note, the Polymarket 'prediction market trading' (which seems like a veneer for actual gambling) saw a $529M trade on the timing of the Iran bombing, with similar trades happening around Venezuala and other US attacks.

Seems a hell of a lot like insider trading, with indivudual directly profitting from this, and greasy AF. Sure it's completely coincidental that Donald Trump Jr is on their advisory board.

This is insane, and also seems like another breach of OPSEC like the pizza orders that targets could monitor as an early warning to prepare themselves.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/poly...g18kLrfmbAuIgRcQrMnoqNh05K0q-Yjcp4mzytpQlRbzp
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s pretty greasy. It’s almost like “insider trading” encouraged.

I watched something about the same thing with sports betting. People will make bets like if a certain player will strike out in a certain inning or whether a player will scratch themselves or something silly like that. Then those players will place money on those bets and perform those actions to get an extra payday.

Considering how these betting markets can so easily be gamed by insiders, I don’t know how they make money.
 
RangerRay said:
Yeah that’s pretty greasy. It’s almost like “insider trading” encouraged.

I watched something about the same thing with sports betting. People will make bets like if a certain player will strike out in a certain inning or whether a player will scratch themselves or something silly like that. Then those players will place money on those bets and perform those actions to get an extra payday.

Considering how these betting markets can so easily be gamed by insiders, I don’t know how they make money.
Click to expand...

Betting markets try to match buyers and sellers, and make money on fees charged to both sides. It's like running a casino - on slots and all the table games, the house take is baked into the math. You'd have to be a real buffoon to fail to make money running a casino.
 
RangerRay said:
Yeah that’s pretty greasy. It’s almost like “insider trading” encouraged.

I watched something about the same thing with sports betting. People will make bets like if a certain player will strike out in a certain inning or whether a player will scratch themselves or something silly like that. Then those players will place money on those bets and perform those actions to get an extra payday.

Considering how these betting markets can so easily be gamed by insiders, I don’t know how they make money.
Click to expand...
Which is weird when off the top of my head there are multiple examples recently of the FBI investigating fight betting patterns with some fights just getting canceled due to suspicions, and the bets are a fraction of the value of the ones they are talking about.
 
Navy_Pete said:
If you can't see the issue with personnel profitting hugely in a rigged crypto gambling site from inside knowledge about impending strikes. while also giving clear indication into the public sphere that something is actually going to happen (vice just a bluff) I'm not sure what else to say.
Click to expand...
I do see a couple of issues. One is plain ordinary insider trading, which is a corruption problem. The other is OPSEC - what is revealed by betting activity, or the number of pizza orders placed for delivery to the Pentagon, or what is revealed by Donald Trump endlessly threatening some other government and making demands. All of the latter are less specific than a debate in Congress over authorizing war against X, which obviously gives X not only time but a pressing motivation to prepare and take precautions. If the US starts doing things by the constitutional numbers again, the pizza index and betting contracts aren't going to matter very much.
Navy_Pete said:
Do you think knowing that strikes are coming days out based on crypto trading bets is maybe a problem that gives a regime you want to 'shock and awe' time to mobilize a bit and get things in play? Iran probably missed it, but you can bet that will be another open source intel fact people are watching in the future.
Click to expand...
If the Iranians weren't able to suss out the situation based on what Trump and other spokespeople for the US government were saying, and the openly reported movements of US forces in the region, I doubt betting contracts were the One Thing they needed to know.

So, yeah, small potatoes.

[Add: it'd be pretty funny if the US government were using a dummy account to make a little cash for itself.]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top