Forwarded from General Flynn ️
ATTENTION!
Update on the War in Eastern Europe (the other war).
My overall assessment is that this war falls into the category of stupid war. It is costly in terms of human lives & for the people of the U.S., it has cost us over $500B (yes, that is a capital B!). So much destruction & several 3rd/4th order consequences that have potential existential long term consequences for America.
That said, looking back before looking forward, we totally screwed up by not bringing Russia into a Eurasian hemisphere post the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Not only a massively strategic & costly error but the political warmongers in our CIA & other components of the national security & M-I complexes along with many puppets in Congress over decades have led America into the “valley of the shadow of death”, a virtual abyss with grave historical consequences.
So many lies, so much deception, so many monumental mistakes by so-called political & diplomatic experts. The only thing they are expert at is continuing to promote more war & driving potential partners & allies into the arms of our most dangerous adversaries.
So what:
Ukraine is experiencing a security & military collapse (never mind a totally corrupt govt).
That said, the catastrophic shortage of personnel within Ukraine’s Armed Forces has reached a breaking point. It is a desperate situation. It exposes a hollowing out of Ukraine’s military & security apparatus. The Ukrainian military leaders remaining are now having to throw their very best troops into conventional roles. Something unheard of in the past. This along with many other indicators of weakened political leaders & a devastated military are only outmatched by a civilian population that is weary and wants this madness to end. They are tired of the destruction, death & their children’s and nation’s future.
Key Perspectives:
1. Severe manpower Crisis
2. Morale deficiencies across the board
3. Untenable equipment losses
4. Multiple battlefield operating systems (Intel, command and control, targeting, etc) diluted or ineffective/non-operational.
5. Etc.
The long term effects for Ukraine’s stability are severe.
Conclusion:
A completely new PEACE & PARTNERSHIP approach must very seriously be considered. America must consider what is best for America. We can completely withdraw or we can be the bigger, more magnanimous of participating (LEADING) nations and influence, cause or force the issue of a major outreach to Russia (the largest holder of nuclear arms on the planet) and be prepared to offer and discuss long term guarantees (no more lies and deception).
The larger, more looming question & something directly impacting this war is:
How do we draw Russia out from under the umbrella of China. East of the Ural Mountains, China is already dominating the terrain. Their people are moving rapidly to take over & control massive energy & rare earth element resources. As China also seeks to destroy us right here at home with deviant activities by applying bio-weapons like COVID, deadly fentanyl attacks, subversive activities on our streets. China knows they must have the A$$ to fight a long physical war if one were to break out (until China feels they are able to take over the USofA, they need strategic resources and Russia has those resources).
Yes, Russia is a communist nation, but it has far more history looking west than it does east.
There could easily be a global meltdown and we must stop thinking conventionally and we must stop listening to the warhawks and other “media talking heads.”
We don’t need short term transactional fixes, we need long term solutions that see a 21st century that fights for peace to be the norm & not the aberration.
For all those name callers who will say I’m a Putin puppet, FO! Come up with a better solution.
There are other objectives of what I describe here, but we need to be thinking critically, long-term & what is in the best interests of AMERICA.
Update on the War in Eastern Europe (the other war).
My overall assessment is that this war falls into the category of stupid war. It is costly in terms of human lives & for the people of the U.S., it has cost us over $500B (yes, that is a capital B!). So much destruction & several 3rd/4th order consequences that have potential existential long term consequences for America.
That said, looking back before looking forward, we totally screwed up by not bringing Russia into a Eurasian hemisphere post the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Not only a massively strategic & costly error but the political warmongers in our CIA & other components of the national security & M-I complexes along with many puppets in Congress over decades have led America into the “valley of the shadow of death”, a virtual abyss with grave historical consequences.
So many lies, so much deception, so many monumental mistakes by so-called political & diplomatic experts. The only thing they are expert at is continuing to promote more war & driving potential partners & allies into the arms of our most dangerous adversaries.
So what:
Ukraine is experiencing a security & military collapse (never mind a totally corrupt govt).
That said, the catastrophic shortage of personnel within Ukraine’s Armed Forces has reached a breaking point. It is a desperate situation. It exposes a hollowing out of Ukraine’s military & security apparatus. The Ukrainian military leaders remaining are now having to throw their very best troops into conventional roles. Something unheard of in the past. This along with many other indicators of weakened political leaders & a devastated military are only outmatched by a civilian population that is weary and wants this madness to end. They are tired of the destruction, death & their children’s and nation’s future.
Key Perspectives:
1. Severe manpower Crisis
2. Morale deficiencies across the board
3. Untenable equipment losses
4. Multiple battlefield operating systems (Intel, command and control, targeting, etc) diluted or ineffective/non-operational.
5. Etc.
The long term effects for Ukraine’s stability are severe.
Conclusion:
A completely new PEACE & PARTNERSHIP approach must very seriously be considered. America must consider what is best for America. We can completely withdraw or we can be the bigger, more magnanimous of participating (LEADING) nations and influence, cause or force the issue of a major outreach to Russia (the largest holder of nuclear arms on the planet) and be prepared to offer and discuss long term guarantees (no more lies and deception).
The larger, more looming question & something directly impacting this war is:
How do we draw Russia out from under the umbrella of China. East of the Ural Mountains, China is already dominating the terrain. Their people are moving rapidly to take over & control massive energy & rare earth element resources. As China also seeks to destroy us right here at home with deviant activities by applying bio-weapons like COVID, deadly fentanyl attacks, subversive activities on our streets. China knows they must have the A$$ to fight a long physical war if one were to break out (until China feels they are able to take over the USofA, they need strategic resources and Russia has those resources).
Yes, Russia is a communist nation, but it has far more history looking west than it does east.
There could easily be a global meltdown and we must stop thinking conventionally and we must stop listening to the warhawks and other “media talking heads.”
We don’t need short term transactional fixes, we need long term solutions that see a 21st century that fights for peace to be the norm & not the aberration.
For all those name callers who will say I’m a Putin puppet, FO! Come up with a better solution.
There are other objectives of what I describe here, but we need to be thinking critically, long-term & what is in the best interests of AMERICA.
This guy missed his calling: he should’ve been a General or something.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1933865630173712826.html
https://www.tg-me.com/RealGenFlynn/4363
https://www.tg-me.com/RealGenFlynn/4364
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1933865630173712826.html
https://www.tg-me.com/RealGenFlynn/4363
https://www.tg-me.com/RealGenFlynn/4364
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Notice how the missile seems to float up there than accelerates in at the end. That’s a hypersonic missile from somewhere. Iran or Yemen, probably.
PS I do not literally mean that the missile “floats” up there.
https://x.com/PatrickByrne
https://patrickbyrne.locals.com
https://www.tg-me.com/PatrickMByrne
PS I do not literally mean that the missile “floats” up there.
https://x.com/PatrickByrne
https://patrickbyrne.locals.com
https://www.tg-me.com/PatrickMByrne
Expect them to stack the inquiry and delay endlessly.
https://x.com/Inevitablewest/status/1933934144821588305
https://x.com/Inevitablewest/status/1933934144821588305
I didn’t want this Middle East war, but now that it's on we should back Israel‘s play. That means sharing intelligence & augmenting anything we can to DEFEND Israeli airspace and its assets as they go about their work. I’m pissed at Bibi but Iran is Iran.
Anonymous Poll
38%
Agree
42%
Disagree
20%
Unsure
Forwarded from General Flynn ️
ATTENTION!
Given the IS-IR conflict, I created SITREPs for those wishing to follow my thinking. I’ll adjust and I won’t always get it right. It is my thinking nonetheless.
Today’s focus: China’s benefits & risks.
Because of this conflict, China’s benefits, are primarily strategic & indirect, rooted in its broader geopolitical & economic interests.
Below are the specific ways China gains:
1. The conflict weakens U.S. Influence in the Middle East. It diverts U.S. attention and resources from Asia, where China faces pressure over Taiwan and the South China Sea. By keeping the U.S. entangled in Middle Eastern crises, China gains breathing room to pursue its Indo-Pacific regional ambitions with less interference.
2. If there is no regime change in IR, it will strengthen ties with them. China’s close relationship with IR, cemented by a 25-year cooperation agreement beginning in 2021, is bolstered by the conflict. IR, increasingly isolated, relies on China as its primary buyer of sanctioned oil (over 90% of IR’s crude exports go to China). This secures China a discounted energy supply, critical for its economy, while giving Beijing leverage over Tehran. China also benefits by its diplomatic voice while not having to commit military forces (yet).
3. The conflict enhances China’s regional diplomatic clout. China is using the conflict to project itself as a neutral & global peacemaker, contrasting with the U.S.’s perceived bias toward IS. By condemning IS actions & calling for de-escalation, China appeals to Arab states & the Global Asian South, boosting its image as a champion of non-Western interests. Its mediation efforts, like the Saudi-Iran rapprochement in 2023, gain China credibility, potentially expanding their influence deeper into Middle Eastern diplomacy.
4. China will take advantage of economic opportunities because of the instability. Due to the regional instability China benefits by disrupting U.S.-aligned trade routes (e.g., through the Suez Canal or Bab Al-Mandab Strait), increasing reliance on China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) infrastructure. However, China prefers “controlled instability”, as a full-scale war could threaten its Middle Eastern oil imports (nearly half its supply) along with many of its BRI projects.
5. China’s keen observation of all military engagements, particularly missile & drone performance, will help to refine their own defense strategies. IR weapons, often incorporating Chinese components or designs, provide real-world testing data. A prolonged conflict could also weaken IS’s technological edge, reducing its ability to counter Chinese tech investments in the region.
6. By supporting IR, China indirectly backs IR’s proxies (e.g., Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis), which challenge IS & U.S. short & long term interests. This low-cost strategy allows China to pressure Western powers without direct confrontation, aligning with its non-interventionist policy. There are many who correctly suggest China supplies weapons components to IR & its proxies, further amplifying its influence.
These benefits are not without significant risks.
A broader regional war will disrupt its energy security & BRI investments, which rely on Middle Eastern stability. Additionally, China’s pro-IR stance strains relations with IS, a key technology partner, potentially limiting access to IS innovation. Beijing’s difficult balancing act—maintaining ties with both IR and IS—requires careful diplomacy to avoid alienating either side. The administration needs to pay close attention here.
Conclusion: China benefits by leveraging the conflict to undermine U.S. dominance, secure cheap oil, enhance its diplomatic stature, & gain military insights, all while maintaining a low-risk, non-interventionist stance. However, these gains depend on the conflict remaining contained, as escalation will jeopardize China’s fragile economy & other geopolitical interests & alliances.
Feedback is important.
Given the IS-IR conflict, I created SITREPs for those wishing to follow my thinking. I’ll adjust and I won’t always get it right. It is my thinking nonetheless.
Today’s focus: China’s benefits & risks.
Because of this conflict, China’s benefits, are primarily strategic & indirect, rooted in its broader geopolitical & economic interests.
Below are the specific ways China gains:
1. The conflict weakens U.S. Influence in the Middle East. It diverts U.S. attention and resources from Asia, where China faces pressure over Taiwan and the South China Sea. By keeping the U.S. entangled in Middle Eastern crises, China gains breathing room to pursue its Indo-Pacific regional ambitions with less interference.
2. If there is no regime change in IR, it will strengthen ties with them. China’s close relationship with IR, cemented by a 25-year cooperation agreement beginning in 2021, is bolstered by the conflict. IR, increasingly isolated, relies on China as its primary buyer of sanctioned oil (over 90% of IR’s crude exports go to China). This secures China a discounted energy supply, critical for its economy, while giving Beijing leverage over Tehran. China also benefits by its diplomatic voice while not having to commit military forces (yet).
3. The conflict enhances China’s regional diplomatic clout. China is using the conflict to project itself as a neutral & global peacemaker, contrasting with the U.S.’s perceived bias toward IS. By condemning IS actions & calling for de-escalation, China appeals to Arab states & the Global Asian South, boosting its image as a champion of non-Western interests. Its mediation efforts, like the Saudi-Iran rapprochement in 2023, gain China credibility, potentially expanding their influence deeper into Middle Eastern diplomacy.
4. China will take advantage of economic opportunities because of the instability. Due to the regional instability China benefits by disrupting U.S.-aligned trade routes (e.g., through the Suez Canal or Bab Al-Mandab Strait), increasing reliance on China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) infrastructure. However, China prefers “controlled instability”, as a full-scale war could threaten its Middle Eastern oil imports (nearly half its supply) along with many of its BRI projects.
5. China’s keen observation of all military engagements, particularly missile & drone performance, will help to refine their own defense strategies. IR weapons, often incorporating Chinese components or designs, provide real-world testing data. A prolonged conflict could also weaken IS’s technological edge, reducing its ability to counter Chinese tech investments in the region.
6. By supporting IR, China indirectly backs IR’s proxies (e.g., Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis), which challenge IS & U.S. short & long term interests. This low-cost strategy allows China to pressure Western powers without direct confrontation, aligning with its non-interventionist policy. There are many who correctly suggest China supplies weapons components to IR & its proxies, further amplifying its influence.
These benefits are not without significant risks.
A broader regional war will disrupt its energy security & BRI investments, which rely on Middle Eastern stability. Additionally, China’s pro-IR stance strains relations with IS, a key technology partner, potentially limiting access to IS innovation. Beijing’s difficult balancing act—maintaining ties with both IR and IS—requires careful diplomacy to avoid alienating either side. The administration needs to pay close attention here.
Conclusion: China benefits by leveraging the conflict to undermine U.S. dominance, secure cheap oil, enhance its diplomatic stature, & gain military insights, all while maintaining a low-risk, non-interventionist stance. However, these gains depend on the conflict remaining contained, as escalation will jeopardize China’s fragile economy & other geopolitical interests & alliances.
Feedback is important.