Subscription

Thursday, February 1, 2024

Deutschland Uber Nichts

 


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show trolls through all the hot topics: Trump's ongoing tussle with E. Jean Carroll, the prospects of a U.S. retaliatory strike against Iran, RFK Jr.'s views on political corruption, and the likely campaign strategy of Sleepy Joe, given his obvious, uhh, weaknesses.


When we get to This Day in History, we consider Richard Nixon's big political comeback in 1968, Germany's fateful and ultimately disastrous decision to resume unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917, the contentious process that led eleven states to secede from the Union in 1860-61, and the cultural significance of racial integration in the decade of the 1960s.

 

In short, we leave no stone unturned in the effort to enlighten YOU.  You're welcome!

 

https://wlea.net/newsmaker-february-1-2024-dr-nick-waddy/ 

 

***


In other news, Michael Barone aptly summarizes in this article some of the reasons why the establishment's guardians of the "truth" are increasingly distrusted by many average Americans.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2829997/systemic-lying-corrodes-once-great-institutions/

 

Our old pal Cornel West is starting his own party, and you may be inclined to scoff, but the fact is that every vote West wins is, in practice, a vote for Trump and the GOP...so get out your checkbooks and be generous in your support for "Justice For All"!

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/01/presidential-candidate-cornell-west-announces-new-justice-for-all-party/ 


For better or worse, House Republicans are moving forward with articles of impeachment against DHS Secretary Mayorkas.  Presumably, that means they believe they have the votes to impeach him in the full House.  Oh boy!  Mayorkas certainly won't be convicted in the Senate, if it evens deigns to hold a trial, but I predict this will indeed "open the floodgates" and lead to many more impeachments of many more federal officials in the years to come.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mayorkas-impeachment-articles-house-homeland-security-vote/

 

Finally, despite the fact that the global establishment has ganged up on Russia in an attempt to punish it economically for invading Ukraine, Russia's economy seems fairly unperturbed.  Of course, this is partly because major economies like those of China and India aren't playing along, but all the same Russia's resilience is impressive and suggests that the Russian war effort in Ukraine can be sustained -- and escalated -- indefinitely.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/21a5be9c-afaa-495f-b7af-cf937093144d?segmentId=b385c2ad-87ed-d8ff-aaec-0f8435cd42d9 

15 comments:

  1. Dr. Waddy from Jack: Re: the Newsmaker broadcast: This administration has one fundamental goal which they seek through two major avenues ; they are determined to "fundamentally transform" our country by: 1. forcing an open southern border in order to admit enough illegals to make of our polity their factotum and 2. continue to take from the undeserving productive and give to the unproductive. I doubt that RFK Jr's lamentations on decreased spending on social engineering are merited. Perhaps we need to reduce Iran to the abject fear President Reagan put into Gaddafi of Libya when he chose to murder US servicemen. " Since you choose to bomb us, we will consider ourselves at liberty to bomb you!"Apparently the dictator consequently decided that a nuclear program was not such a good idea after all. Simple it is. A good question that is : ' in this country can we expect not to be legally condemned for defending ourselves against legal charges? The apparent answer: "why yes , go to it, as long as you are part of a protected class (i.e. if you support the antiamerican left). But if not, expect legal rights only at the indulgence of that faction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dr. Waddy from Jack: By early '68 we were not surprised that Nixon was a very viable candidate for the nomination but for those of us who had followed his career through the '60 election and beyond it was nonetheless very astonishing. For all the passionate hurly burly, the budding, blooming Age of Aquarius, the advent of a morally and intellectually transcendent generation, all the "Clean for Gene " (McCarthy)grudging surely temporary, acquiescence to the methods of the disdained
    "establishment" - for all that, who won out? Mr. Suburbia, cloth coated square, John Doe himself . Its still laughable to think of our discomfiture at that. In WWI the submarine was so new and untried that no country had the experience with it necessary to make wise decisions on the possible consequences of its use. Who then could ever have thought that these tiny soup cans could neutralize the dreadnoughts and cruisers of the Royal Navy upon which Britain depended for its life? First Sea Lord Jellicoe (not an impulsive man) told American Admiral Sims in 1917 that Britain was close to starvation for food and supplies due to the astonishing efficacy of the Uboats. I think this aspect of the first Battle of the Atlantic may have influenced the American entry as much as the outrage produced by the sinking of American ships.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dr. Waddy from Jack: Russia's apparently resistant economy and the implications for its war effort bode unshirted hell for Ukrainians. What a terrible mistake we made in encouraging Ukraine to seek Nato membership, thus guaranteeing the eventual Russian onslaught. Some how (?!) we thought Russia would simply accept this fundamental, unendurable threat to its national security. Of course they didn't; they are a rugged, brutal country long since tempered by almost indescribable hardship. We must do what we can for Ukraine: tell Russia we will never vote for Ukrainian membership in Nato and we must offer to help Ukraine recover. We have done Ukraine and yes, Russia, an ignorant, terrible wrong despite our good intentions and we must make very painful amends to right it. Historically even an economically dysfunctional Russia has been capable of enormous military destruction; a largely unhampered Russian economy can certainly support as much.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dr. Waddy from Jack: On the Mayorkas impeachment, you've convinced me. West: "Justice for All' ehh? Can't gainsay that; sign me right up. Given his "assertive" dialectical style, I can't wait to see Cornel West in a debate.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dr. Waddy from Jack: I was wrong above to suggest the possible starvation of Britain by the Uboats was a reason for our entry into the war equal to the outrage caused by unrestricted attacks on Americans at sea. I still think it was a factor but was ancillary. At that time, many in the American public did not like "Perfidious Albion" or see it as a desirable ally.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr. Waddy from Jack: In Shaw's St. Joan two princes of the church share the view (to paraphrase): "why. if the flock heard of the deceptions we practice to advance such as the perception of 'miracles', they wouldn't believe it! But if it enhances their faith it is well." Today's antiamerican left starts out with a somewhat similar patronizing view of its widespread deceit described in the Barone article and it embraces the same rationale: " its for the good of the unwashed in flyover country". But when America realizes what they are doing and insolently reacts, they manifest vindictive outrage at such ingratitude and heresy , much as the 15th century church would have done. Of course they have not yet reprised the Inquisition in all its fiery glory but they do not shrink from ruining peoples' lives. And they may well when empowered so, adopt the imaginative corporal measures so casually practiced by the 20th century totalitarians they admire for their "political" efficacy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I should say "if" empowered so . . . . Jack

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jack, as we have seen, the Biden Administration chose not to attack Iran directly, and it's hard to imagine that they ever would.

    Jack, I don't know nearly enough about WWI to be able to say whether the Germans foresaw, before the war, the strategic potential of U-Boats. I doubt it, though. One wonders whether unleashing them in 1915 and 1917 was occasioned just as much by domestic politics as by wartime strategy. I mean, the German public must have been pretty steamed about the British blockade, which was after all gradually starving them, while the German Navy twiddled its thumbs in port. Unleashing the U-Boats at least gave the German government the ability to say it was doing something at sea...

    Ah, now that is the $64,000 question: will West, or any of the third party candidates, appear in any of the debates? I would say that's extremely unlikely, since Biden wouldn't hear of it, and I actually think the debates themselves may be canceled. I can think of many excellent reasons why both sides might like to quash them.

    No, Britain's travails in 1917 probably didn't move many Americans -- but they might have lit a fire under Wilson...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dr. Waddy from Jack: Yeah, I forgot about all that: Wilhelm II was just as dicey about using the very formidable battle line he had built (and in doing so may well have radically changed 20th century history) as was Hitler with his very much smaller battleship force. Completely understandable that Germans must have chafed at their surface fleet's sporadic engagement while they endured the blockade. Its almost incredible but the Germans nearly closed the Atlantic in WWI with those primitive U"boats" and then did it again in WWII with "boats" (I think subs are still called that today )that were better but not radically different until near the end of the war.The first unrestricted Uboat campaign was partly necessitated by the great danger a surfaced Uboat faced, even from some merchant ships (the Germans did try it). Flags can't be seen very well at any distance (I was a Navy signalman) so national identification, especially while submerged, was undependable. The resumption of unrestricted Uboat attacks in 1917 was part of an overall strategy - not the whole strategy - motivated by a perception that the war MUST be won in the foreseeable future. I don't know if the boche knew how close they may have been to disabling Britain with the Uboats alone. Too, they might well have expected that the resumption would bring the US in; the other major effort was a massive land assault, enabled in part by Russia's withdrawal and driven by the need to win before America arrived (?) (did the Germans fear the American army, I wonder). Makes sense that a 19th century Virginian of at least comfortable means growing up and intellectual accomplishment , like Wilson might well have been an Anglophile. I think that the American university of that time followed a British model.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dr. Waddy from Jack: I think its unprecedented but might this profusion of possible independent or 3rd party candidates generate a broadcast debate among them?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dr. Waddy from Jack: I think President Reagan would have assaulted the guilty parties with means guaranteed to cause them much anxiety. I suppose this action by kumbayaa Biden could have that effect but it may not have been intended so.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jack, don't get me started on the abject stupidity of building a massive German Navy that was still not quite big enough to be of any use. The Kaiser was a Dummkopf!

    Yes, it is astounding how close the Germans came to denying the Brits dominion over the seas in both world wars, especially considering that the means they used to (almost) do so were basically an afterthought. They started both wars with a pathetic U-Boat fleet and were improvising thereafter.

    Ah, a debate amongst the also-rans is a distinct possibility! That would be fun to watch. Trump might even be zany enough to attend. Biden is the one who desperately needs the third party candidates to go away, and so would never lower his prodigious "dignity" by speaking to them.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dr. Waddy from Jack: Some interesting factoids: I believe I read that WWI Uboats actually either sank more tonnage or more ships than in WWII. Over 700 Uboats (and some presumptuous Italian ones too) were sunk.Some appalling percentage of Uboat crews, over a majority, never returned. By 1944 the Germans had developed a very advanced sub which made full use of the snorkel to operate submerged at theretofore unreachable speeds. One of them snuck into what was considered a safe area near Liverpool and blew up a gasoline tanker. My father witnessed that. No wonder that those guys "burned the candle at both ends" when they made it to port.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Over 700 in WWII alone. . . .

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, I believe about 70% of the U-Boat crew members died in their tin cans. It wasn't a very fun job while you were at it, and the retirement plan was even worse!

    ReplyDelete