Saturday, March 07, 2026

In which the pond enters the reptile war zone, and is trapped in a hell hole bunker with "Ned", the bromancer and the Ughmann for an ungodly twenty minutes or so ...

 

Today was the day the reptiles went all in ...



There's no way that the pond could carpet bomb that mob into submission. 

Instead the pond had to chose its targets carefully, and so ended up withe usual suspects...

"Ned" led the charge ... aided by a frankly wretched collage...



The header: Donald Trump’s Iran gamble is flawed but necessary: The US President launched this war without a clear plan and continues to radiate both hyper-confidence and abject confusion. But he should be supported for this action.

The caption for the frankly tedious collage: With the neatness of his earlier operation in Venezuela in his rear vision, Donald Trump is learning that Iran is a far more complex challenge Artwork by Frank Ling.

"Ned" sounded all in, at least in the header, but as always with "Ned", the devil was in the mind-numbingly tedious both siderist detail.

Running at a bigly ten minutes, replete with graphs, the pond felt a need to surrender immediately, to run up the white flag, and decided to take it on the chin:

Amid the unpredictability of an expanding war and confusion over Donald Trump’s war aims in Iran there is one certainty – sooner or later the President will declare a victory and invoke the military demolition in Iran as proof of a transformation of power in the Middle East.
Trump is now sucked into the cult of the strongman, with all the shocks this carries. The US-Israeli war machine under Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu is dismantling much of the Iranian security state and its defence capability, starting with the stunning precision decapitation of its leadership. The consequences of this incredibly intense Trump-Netanyahu war will reverberate for decades. Iran’s strategic weight in the region is being devastated, yet where its political system finishes from this military battering defies prediction.
The regime of the ayatollahs, now hostage to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, is fighting for its survival, and when authoritarian regimes confront a survival crisis they act from desperation. They have nothing to lose, hence Iran’s attack on the Persian Gulf states and beyond.
The depth of the regime’s resilience is being tested but its defiance is apparent, revealed in the intention to appoint as its successor the hardliner Mojtaba Khamenei, son of assassinated ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a reminder of Trump’s inability to command Iran’s political future.
With the neatness of his earlier operation in Venezuela in his rear vision, Trump is learning that Iran is a far more complex challenge. He can command the US military campaign but he cannot control the erupting impact of the forces he has unleashed – as Europe moves to defend its interests, Israel launches a fresh campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon and global energy prices are set to skyrocket with damaging domestic impacts.
Trump’s big mistake
Trump radiates hyper-confidence about the military results and abject confusion about the political future. At mid-week he said Iran “has no navy, it’s been knocked out, they have no air force, it’s been knocked out, they have no air detection, that’s been knocked out. Just about everything’s been knocked out.”
Yet at week’s end a frustrated Trump declared that Mojtaba Khamenei was an “unacceptable” choice as leader and that he wanted a role in that decision.
Trump has signalled – in an interview with The New York Times – that his preference for leadership change was replication of the Venezuelan model where US forces extracted its dictator, Nicolas Maduro, denied the nation’s democratic forces and relied on a regime replacement more acceptable to US pressure.

Make of that what you will, as the reptiles decided on a break with liddle Marco, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stands behind as President Donald Trump. All week official Washington has been riddled in chaos and contradictions from the President and his senior officials about the war aims. Picture: AP




The pond is hearing talk of chaos and confusion and contradictions, but when has that ever troubled the Daily Zionist News?

Trying to apply this model to Iran is beyond bizarre. Earlier in the week, when asked who he would like to rule Iran, Trump said: “Most of the people we had in mind are dead.” Might the regime be stronger in reinvention than Trump anticipated?
Trump won’t commit US ground forces but reports that Iranian Kurds coming from Iraq might become the “boots on the ground” are deeply ominous, raising the risk of ethnic and sectarian conflicts in Iran as well posing a new danger to Tehran. Might Trump authorise the CIA to encourage resistance on the ground?
Israel’s objectives
The evidence is that Netanyahu has a much clearer sense of Israeli objectives in this war than does Trump of American objectives. Trump’s mistake in announcing the war was tying the campaign to the goal of regime change when he had no plan whatsoever to achieve that goal.
Indeed, his method was to tell the Iranian people to rise up and “take over your government” when they had no arms, no organisation and the regime was ready to shoot them.
Air power alone is a forlorn means to achieve regime change in a nation of 90 million people. Trump launched this war without seriously devising a plan to achieve his goal of regime change beyond the military elimination of the top 50 leaders.
All week official Washington has been riddled in chaos and contradictions from the President and his senior officials about the war aims. The efficiency of the military contrasted with the ineptitude of the political leaders, with no sign Trump made any proper assessment of how the regime might respond, the strategic impact of a wider conflict or the global economic consequences of a possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz, where tankers are already ablaze.
Trump and Netanyahu identified Iran’s weakness and went for the kill. This was ruthless opportunism. Despite claims to the contrary, every logic still points to a relatively short US war given Trump’s impatient character, the prospect that US opinion will be sceptical of the war, erupting energy prices and ongoing strains on the US military.

At this point, the reptiles began to wade into graphs as a kind of sea invasion:



"Ned" pressed on, in a kind of 'boots on the verbiage ground' invasion:

Trump’s suggested four or five weeks while Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said it could last eight weeks. The bottom line is obvious: Trump won’t be duplicating the disastrous commitment of George W. Bush in Iraq. But any US war termination by Trump won’t necessarily end the conflicts now being unleashed or internal struggles within Iran.
Despite the confusion and the blunders, criticism about an illegal war, scepticism from allies and lukewarm support at home, the US and Israel are justified in their strike to eliminate much of the danger to the region and the world from the post-1979 Iranian revolutionary regime.
This central conclusion can be expected to carry the day – that the time for reckoning finally has come for Iran’s fanatical and terrorist regime, given its sponsorship of terrorism, its obsession about destroying the Israeli state, its periodic military strikes against the US, Israel and the West, its repression and killing of its own people, and its quest for a nuclear weapons capacity to guarantee its immunity.
Albanese, Wong make an important decision
Given Trump’s decision to mount a decisive strike against the regime, strategic and moral assessments dictate support – despite the serious risks and downsides involved. This is the judgment made by the Albanese government, with Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong in the lead. It is one of their most important foreign policy decisions so far and hostility from the left will be fierce, as they know.
While putting the emphasis on the need to deny Iran a nuclear weapon and sidestepping regime change, Labor’s response was faster and firmer than many European nations, notably Britain and France. Australian support is bipartisan. Albanese said: “We support the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent Iran from continuing to threaten international peace and security.”

There came another visual distraction: The strategic interest for Australia is obvious: we need a short war, a reconstructed Iran, a refocus as soon as possible by the US on the Indo-Pacific.




How simple it sounded, how easy peasy. A short war, reconstruct Iran, and then focus on the Indo-Pacific war with China by Xmas!

"Ned" sounded pleased that we'd decided to get on board with a narcissistic, demented king, always keen to distract from his domestic crimes (what with the puppy killer being replaced by an MMA clown as silly as a brain-afflicted sausage):

This reveals Labor’s fidelity to US power, the moral case for the war and a belated recognition the so-called rules-based order is on life support, being submerged by ugly power realities.
This war highlights Trump’s obsession about threatening or attacking weak targets, from Greenland to Venezuela to a diminished Iran. Now he crosses a threshold: herein is Trump as champion of great-power muscle flexing. Where his predecessor, Joe Biden, was defined by his sudden withdrawal from Afghanistan, Trump is defined by the use of force to smash Iran. He thrives on the notion.
It is a mistake to extrapolate from Trump’s military venture in Iran to think Russia and China will be intimidated by the strongman in action – Trump’s aggression against the weak does not equate to audacity against the strong, notably President Vladimir Putin and President Xi Jinping. Trump is a gambler. Iran proves that – but he gambles only with the battlefield loaded in his favour.
Destroying Iran’s proxies
Trump and Netanyahu have combined in an awesome display of their military and intelligence power that represents a dramatic reversal from Iran’s ascendancy at October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched its massacre of Israelis. This event triggered one of the most important strategic sea changes in Israel’s history.
Netanyahu grasped that Israel’s position was being relentlessly eroded by Iranian tactics and proxies. He decided that such proxies – Hamas and Hezbollah – must be destroyed and that Israel must attack Iran as the source of endless regional conflict.
That strategy is being played out in Tehran in an unfolding military catastrophe for the Islamists.

At this point the reptiles flung in a whole series of graphs, just to ensure that this "Ned" Everest climb took on an interminable length:





Apologies, but it's the pond's duty to show the reptiles in all their PowerPoint glory, as "Ned" resumed his natter:

Trump, meanwhile, is engaged in a project to defy recent history. After past failures in Iraq and Afghanistan – given the disreputable tag the “forever wars” – he seeks to demonstrate that a sustained aerial campaign without “boots on the ground”, in lockstep with Israel, assisted by winning control of the skies and applied over a short period, can deliver strategic and political transformation where previous regional interventions failed or were discredited.
As his presidency unfolds Trump succumbs more and more to the great man theory of history. Whether the Iran war inflates or burns this trait remains to be seen. But Trump is only in the second year of his four-year term and is engaged in a process of presidential rediscovery. The Iran war, for example, is not how he won the presidency. In this 2024 triumph, Trump said: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.” In his inaugural address, presumably with Ukraine in mind, he said he wanted to be judged by “the wars we never get into”.
Trump, as usual, will have no trouble turning on a dime and saying that defeating what he calls a “very wicked radical dictatorship” is the path to peace in the Middle East. But presenting as a strongman comes with risks.
He told the regime’s military to “lay down your weapons” or “face certain death”. This was phony bravado. On day three of the war he announced he had “fulfilled” his promise to the Iranian people – yet the regime was still in place with its capacity to kill unarmed civilians. Again, it was just showmanship.
The next day Trump was all over the place. He said the worst-case scenario was putting in power somebody “who’s as bad as the previous person” – ironic given the prospective father-son transition.
After meeting Trump, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said: “The American government does not have a clearly formulated strategy for the future civilian leadership of the country.”
That’s a polite way of describing it. Meanwhile US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said getting people to overthrow the government was “not the objective”.
Two contradictory truths
There are two contradictory truths here: no other US president would have launched this war and no other US president would have been so cavalier about the process. Might Trump’s war actually fail? After one week, that’s hard to see but it cannot be dismissed.
The more relevant question is: how successful will it be? Regular repeats of this war, say each two years, cannot be the future. Trump needs a new political alignment in Iran. Unless the ayatollahs are deposed, it is difficult to imagine the nuclear agenda being shut down.

There came a last AV distraction: President Donald Trump has warned the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to surrender or face "guaranteed death" as US strikes devastate Tehran's military capabilities. Trump made the remarks at an event with the Inter Miami soccer team at the White House on Thursday, local time. Trump claimed Tehran was reaching out to the United States about making a deal amid US and Israeli strikes on Iran. "They're calling, they're saying 'how do we make a deal?' I said you're being a little bit late," he said.




A final saucy doubt crept into "Ned's" narrative:

Given the Trump-Netanyahu goal is to ensure Iran cannot develop nuclear weapons, then unless they secure a major change to the regime the war ultimately may be judged a failure.
Might the IRGC outlast Trump’s war? Who has the greater threshold to absorb pain? It is unlikely to be Trump. That’s why he needs military results and needs them quickly.
Even if the regime survives, Trump’s justification will become the removal of Iran’s missile capacity and industry and the substantial demolition of its nuclear agenda. Trump, at the minimum, must be able to deliver on these military justifications for the war.
This is a far more serious venture than anything Trump has done before. Hubris and posing won’t cut it. The exhortations from Hegseth are hardly reassuring given his mid-week rant that the Iranian regime “are toast and they know it, or at least soon enough, they will know it”.
In reality, the future lies on a spectrum of unpredictability that may range from Iran fracturing as a society, to a pro-Western government or the mullahs holding things together in an Iran locked into a cycle of despair. On the regional and global stage, the downside is how much this war reinforces the degeneration to a “might is right” world disorder that ultimately benefits the authoritarian powers such as China and Russia.
Israel is entrenched as a regional superpower, but looking beyond Iran, what does this mean for a Palestinian peace given Netanyahu opposes a two-state solution? The idea that Trump might restrain Israel on the West Bank is remote.
What this means for Australia
The strategic interest for Australia is obvious: we need a short war, a reconstructed Iran, a refocus as soon as possible by the US on the Indo-Pacific and a prioritising on competition and balancing Chinese power.
The critique that Trump is waging an illegal war will mobilise much of the progressive class. Indeed, they may have a narrow sense of the law on their side, but they don’t have common sense or a better world.
Consider the position: Iran for decades has waged wars by proxies killing Israelis, spreading terror across the region, funding terrorist organisations, being responsible for the deaths of thousands, killing and torturing thousands of its own people, and seeking to acquire a nuclear capacity so it becomes invulnerable.
The message implicit in the legal critique is that Iran cannot be touched because it poses no imminent threat to the US while it is apparent that neither persuasion nor diplomacy – only force – will change its declared missions. Such legalisms keep the door open for Iran to develop its nuclear capacity with devastating consequences – the spread of nuclear weapons across the region, a far more dangerous fate for Israel and a manifestly more dangerous world.
This argument fails on morality and practicality. You cannot expect leaders in a democracy to follow a legal prescription that assists a terrorist regime to expand its terrorism and the number of peoples and countries it can threaten.
The US President couldn’t care less about international law but the international legal case against him is one of the weakest arguments against his tactics.
Trump is giving Australia a big message. The old world is disappearing; the new world is about power realities. This must be dawning on the Albanese government, the question being: When will they do something about it?

When will they do something? What can they do?

Why they must become Crusaders, and sing along with Faux Noise ...




Speaking of Crusaders, the bromancer was also out and about on a war footing:




The header: American air power and weakened ruling elite not enough to guarantee Iran’s regime collapse; Democracy doesn’t seem the most plausible best outcome, given the circumstances of the Islamic Republic and the specific paths generally taken when authoritarian regimes fall.

The caption: The majority of people of Iran, repeatedly betrayed by broken promises and shattered dreams, want an end to the ayatollahs’ rule.

The good news was that while he was on a war footing, the bromancer only managed five minutes of regime change, surely enough time to fix everything ...

How would regime change in Iran actually happen?
In Iran, the state is at war with the society. Iranian society embodies something of Persian cultural richness over 2½ millennia. (Fun fact from Persian history: more than 2000 years ago, Cyrus the Great freed the Jewish people from Babylonian slavery and enabled the building of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.)
Iranian society exhibits courage, idealism, poetry. It has the energy of youth and the wisdom of the ages. Iranian filmmakers, mostly dissidents, produce exquisite films, either non-political or slyly anti-the ayatollahs’ regime. The Iranian diaspora in the West, not least Australia, are hugely successful – doctors, therapists, technicians. In short, Iranian society has the culture.
The Iranian state, however, has the guns. In our brutal world, guns routinely beat culture, at least in the short term.
How Israel killed Khamenei with a missile from space
The US and Israel, and all civilised people, want regime change in Iran. But there’s still every chance of the ayatollahs’ regime surviving, though it’s unpredictable. The ayatollahs’ rule could indeed collapse. That’s possible too. The majority of Iranians want this. How could such regime unravelling come about?
In the Cold War, when the Americans wanted to effect regime change somewhere, they looked for regime enemies, whom they then funded, advised and equipped, a move they’re now trying with Iranian Kurds. They seldom undertook direct military intervention.
They never tried regime change just from the air. American air power is awesome. The lesson of all conflicts since World War II is that with US air power on your side, you cannot lose, provided you have some ground force. But without a ground force at all, it’s extremely difficult to destroy a regime.
Yet the Islamic Republic has never been weaker. If ever it’s going to fall apart, surely it’s now.
Dictatorships, authoritarian regimes generally, fall in a few specific ways. They start to liberalise and liberalisation gets out of control. That happened to the Soviet Union under Mikhail Gorbachev. Or the ruling elite, in response to domestic or international pressure, moves intentionally to some kind of democracy. This happened with the end of Suharto’s rule in Indonesia. The democratic elections that followed were held under the old authoritarian constitution. Similarly, the rulers of white, apartheid South Africa voluntarily ceded power to majority rule, meaning black rule. This went reasonably well, notwithstanding contemporary South Africa’s problems, because of the grace and magnanimity of Nelson Mandela.

Sssh, don't mention Israel's attempt to help out by selling nuclear weapons to South Africa, instead a ghoulish moment, A still from a video taken January 9-11 shows bodies and mourners outside a morgue in Iran, following a crackdown on protests in Tehran province Kahrizak. Picture: UGC/AP



The bromancer continued to dance around, as much in hope as certainty:

Dictatorships can be replaced following total military defeat, as happened with the Nazis in Germany, and the military in Japan, after WWII. Internal regional hostilities can become unmanageable and lead to civil war. That’s how the artificial communist dictatorship of Yugoslavia ended.
More commonly, a state’s security forces simply refuse to shoot civilians. This was crucial in the collapse of communism in Poland. So far, Iran’s security forces readily kill civilians in huge numbers. The regime is also yet to display any debilitating internal divisions, though the regular army resents the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, itself internally factionalised. Are there CIA clients in the IRGC?
What about Islamic models? Iran has been a Shia, theocratic, Islamist state since the 1979 revolution Ayatollah Khomeini led. But the emphasis has switched. It’s become a national security state, dominated by the IRGC. Pakistan has long balanced Islamism with the military, with the military predominating. That was the equation in Indonesia under Suharto.
The other way a dictatorship unravels is if there’s fatal conflict within the ruling elite.

The reptiles decided to fling in another AV distraction, Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong reacts to reports of some Australian mosques mourning the recent death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. “In relation to the mourning of the Ayatollah that’s been reported … I’m really disappointed that people would want to do that,” Ms Wong said. “This is a man who has led a regime which has caused death in many parts of the world. “It is a regime that engineered … attacks on Australian soil and a regime that killed its own citizens.”




The bromancer apparently wanted to feel an irrational surge of hope in his warrior, crusader loins, and yet:

The ayatollahs’ rule could conceivably succumb to any of these dynamics. But it has a few automatic stabilisers as well. Shia Islamist ideology has lost a lot of fervour, but it’s still genuinely held by a significant minority of Iranians. Even in distant Australia some Shia mosques mourned and eulogised Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, one of the longest-serving dictators in the world, and one whose rule was brutal and savage. The Iranian state has murdered tens of thousands of its protesting citizens this year alone.
Belief, even if irrational, is powerful. There’s still an Islamist-believing base in Iran. Secondly, the regime has become spectacularly corrupt. The IRGC, somewhat like the old Indonesian military but on a bigger scale, has become an economic colossus. A lot of people with a lot of money don’t want fundamental change.
On top of that, the Iranian state has not only murdered tens of thousands of its own people, it has spread the act of killing far through the society, not only by IRGC troops, but also the Basij militia. Many thousands of Iranians have been actively complicit in murder. These folks know if Iran ever became free, a democracy, the families of all those murdered could well demand accountability and justice.

Another interruption, Israel took the decision to kill Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in November and was planning to carry out the operation around six months later, Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Thursday (March 5)




The bromancer began to sound as befuddled as the King himself:

They also know that as devastating as the US and Israeli military campaign is, it has its own fairly severe time limits. They hope to wait it out. Only about a quarter of Americans support Donald Trump’s military action. Barely half of Republicans support it. Democrats are running hard on the financial costs of the military campaign.
If Iran manages to kill some more Americans, or injure the global economy in a way that registers as higher prices for American households, this will affect even Trump’s resolve, as congressional midterm elections approach.
The maximum time Trump has suggested is four or five weeks.
There’s another paradox. Although Iran has still a well-educated population and a sophisticated middle class, it doesn’t have much meaningful recent history of democracy. In the past hundred years it’s been ruled by four men – two shahs and two ayatollahs, all four dictators. Iran has been repeatedly betrayed by broken promises and shattered dreams. The first of those two shahs modernised Iran and produced rapid economic growth. His son ran a murderous security state, though they were amateurs compared with the viciousness of the ayatollahs’ regimes.

In case you missed that line in the bromancer's screed, The maximum time Trump has suggested for the campaign is four or five weeks. Picture: Mandel NGAN / AFP



The bromancer ended on a note of cautious optimism, though shying away from a big bet:

At first the ayatollahs liberated Iran from the shah’s secret police and offered something of Islamic idealism, but quickly revealed themselves to be obscurantist theocrats, totalitarian ideologues and savage in their suppression of dissent. If Khamenei’s son, Mojtada, becomes long-term ruler, the ayatollahs will have transformed themselves into a dynastic thiefdom, a la North Korea.
Another problem is that, internationally, democracy doesn’t enjoy such great prestige these days. It’s no longer the obvious route to modernisation and peace. Even in Australia, fewer than half those aged 18-24 think democracy is always the best form of government.
Nonetheless, sustained US and Israeli strikes may so destroy the ability of the Iranian state to function that it succumbs to internal disorder, perhaps an element of ethnic break-up, especially centred on the Kurdish minority. The worst outcome is a North Korea-style Iran. You could get a wildly nationalist leader, an Iranian Vladimir Putin.
Trump surely thinks the most plausible good outcome is simply a more reasonable dictator, the so-called Venezuela solution. The ideal would be what political scientists call a “repressive-responsive” regime. This would eschew the nuclear program altogether, concentrate on economic development and, while maintaining strict political control, allow a wide degree of personal autonomy, while responding to people’s needs.
It’s a reasonable hope. But don’t bet your house on it.

And so much for the hapless, repressed people of Iran: "A more reasonable dictator"

Much like King Donald himself ...




Oh they do regime change in style at the lizard Oz.

And so, if you're a trinitarian, on to the Holy Ghost, which is to say the unreformed seminarian known as the Ughmann:



The header: War, energy security and the brutal lessons of power: Despots know the truth: cripple energy, and everything collapses. War choking the Middle East is showing us how the world really works and what fuels it runs on.

The caption: A fire blazes in the oil depots of Shahran, northwest of Tehran. Picture: Atta Kenare /AFP

Usually the pond would attempt some analysis, perhaps even offer the odd counterpoint, but the reptile strikes this day are so massive, the pond so intimidated, that all the pond could manage to was record the reptiles laying it out for the hive mind.

It turned out that the Ughmann was just your old-fashioned realpolitik dude, a man to gladden the heart of Bismarck and Mao:

The current Middle Eastern war underscores how the world really works and what fuels it runs on.
First, as Chairman Mao Zedong put it, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”
International law is a mirage that middle powers cite, evil powers exploit and superpowers honour in the breach. If you have the guns and are willing to shoot, you make the law. There is no international police force and no penalty for starting wars beyond the unimaginable consequences that flow from them and the high risk that you will shoot yourself in the foot.

Just to hammer home the unreformed seminarian's tastes, the reptiles flung in a reminder, Chairman Mao Zedong.




That reminded the pond that it was in the presence of another cult:




Sorry, the Ughmann is busy with listicles and it was rude to interrupt:

Second, the world runs on hydrocarbons. This is also real power. The troika that delivers more than 80 per cent of the world’s primary energy is still coal, oil and gas. Energy security is essential and green energy an aspiration. With the war choking off one-fifth of the world’s supplies of oil and liquefied natural gas, the price of both has spiked. So has the price of coal because it can be substituted for gas in power production. If this persists for any length of time, the world will rediscover a brutal truth: energy shortages spread quickly from stalled tankers to inflation, industry and politics.
Europe has seen its natural gas prices surge by 70 per cent because it has decided it is best to import every molecule of the fuel that is essential to keep the lights on in its weather-dependent electricity system. To lose one gas supplier may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.
First, Europe bet on the goodwill of a gangster in sourcing gas from Russia, then on enduring stability in the Middle East as it switched sources to Qatar.

The reptiles next flung in a bigly AV distraction, MST Financial Senior Energy Analysis Saul Kavonic warns Iran’s attacks on key oil and energy infrastructure could be globally detrimental. “We’ve basically got Iran in an extensional threat situation, lashing out at everything, threatening passage through the Strait of Hormuz and directly targeting key oil and energy infrastructure in the gulf,” Mr Kavonic told Sky News host Steve Price. “Basically, entering the apocalypse scenario for energy security, which has been war-gamed by nations going back 50 years. “The market is severely underestimating the risk here. “We’re looking at the biggest energy price shock in generations.”




The pond doesn't usually gloat, but if you happen to have an EV, you won't be getting the same sort of ticker shock as gas guzzlers. 

Sure, if the world's economy goes to hell in a handbasket - King Donald's tariff plan all along - electricity prices will rise as will the cost of everything else, but if you followed the reptiles down the renewables denialist road, and stayed true to gas and oil, you'd currently be in a pretty pickle:

Energy security is national security, and Europe is an energy vassal. That Australia is determined to mimic it is an act of supernatural stupidity.
In passing, let’s also add that Iran is specifically targeting energy infrastructure right across the Middle East as it lashes out in self-defence. Here it is following a playbook used by Russia in its war on Ukraine. This underlines the fact that despots understand what our government does not: energy is the economy. Cripple a nation’s power supply and everything else collapses. Note that no one is blowing up wind farms.
Finally, no one knows where this conflict will lead and there is every chance that 25 years from now we still will be kicking through the rubble, marvelling at what new horror has slithered out.
When God banished Satan from heaven in Paradise Lost, the Prince of Darkness simply set up shop in hell, determined for the rest of eternity: “To do aught good never will be our task, but ever to do ill our sole delight.” Humanity was collateral damage. Satan no doubt has welcomed Iran’s recently arrived supreme leader to Hades as a handy utility player on Team Damnation.
Working on a documentary marking the 30th anniversary of the election of the Howard government served as a timely reminder that wars bleed into each other.

There's a passage to remind correspondents of the true depths of the Ughmann's analysis, as the reptiles prodded him to relive ancient times, US marines take position near a portrait of late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003. Picture: Christophe Simon /AFP




Sure enough, the Ughmann went there, and even worse, decided to drag in the King, the lying rodent and Lord Downer:

The 2003 US-led coalition that deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein removed Iran’s main rival in the Persian Gulf and reshaped the region’s balance of power. Tehran exploited the vacuum by backing Shia militias in Iraq and expanding a network of proxy forces across the region, from Hezbollah in Lebanon to Hamas in Gaza and the Houthis in Yemen. This entire edifice was aimed at erasing Israel from the river to the sea.
No less an authority than Donald Trump agrees. At the February 2016 Republican debate in South Carolina, he called the Iraq war “a disgrace and an embarrassment”.
“I said it loud and clear,” Trump said. “ ‘You’ll destabilise the Middle East.’ That’s exactly what happened.”

Time for a snap of the King in his early glory, Donald Trump during a rally in 2016. Picture: AP /Steve Helber




What a relief not to be reminded of his aspirin paws, his strange neck marking, and his bonespurs ...




And at that point, the Ughmann went there, still fighting a completely useless war, bringing out the antipodean equivalents of Tony Bleagh ...

There is no doubt John Howard sincerely believed the US and British intelligence assessment that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction when he committed Australian forces to the fight. In an interview with Sky News, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull said the war was a massive mistake but defended Howard’s reasoning.
“John always had this view, rightly or wrongly, that the British had insights into the Middle East because of historical connections that were separate and, in some respects, better than those of the United States,” Turnbull said. “So, he was comforted by the assurances he was getting from London more than he was comforted by the assurances he was getting from Washington.”
The Iraq war was a case of imperial overreach that did great damage to the US domestically and internationally, and the consequences echo to this day.
But it should be remembered that president George W. Bush followed a long and public road to it. Congress authorised the invasion, the UN gave Iraq a final warning to comply with weapons inspections or face “serious consequences” and secretary of state Colin Powell made the case before the UN Security Council.
Howard believes his decision to support the US was right.
“I think both as a foreign policy decision, but also as an expression of our closeness to the United States,” he told Sky News. “I mean, we expected them in a pinch to help us, and although they didn’t physically need us, they wanted … a coalition of the willing.”
That coalition grew to 49 countries that supported the operation, though only a handful contributed combat troops. It is timely to remember that one of those countries was Denmark, which deployed a combat battalion to Basra and lost seven soldiers during four years of fighting.
Former foreign minister Alexander Downer believes “it was a great thing to get rid of Saddam Hussein”.
“I think that the counterfactual is the world would have been more unstable and worse with Saddam Hussein remaining in power, even though I can see the Americans handled the post-invasion period very, very badly,” Downer said.

Thank you Lord Downer, as full of wisdom and insight as ever, as the reptiles flung in a last AV distraction, Iran has targeted energy facilities in Qatar and Saudi Arabia – a major escalation in the conflict which could threaten the global supply of oil and gas and drive up prices. An oil refinery in Saudi Arabia was damaged by debris from drones, which were intercepted but fell onto the facility. Meanwhile, Qatar had to shut down the world’s largest natural gas plant after it was hit by Iranian missiles.




Then the Ughmann produced a rousing finale ...

That they did, and those errors linger to this day. Now there is another war to fix the problems left by the last and we are promised this one will go better, though no one in the Trump administration can say with any clarity what better looks like. Time will be the only judge.
We cannot foresee the future but we know this much: we live in a more uncertain world than the one we thought was enduring after World War II. In many ways it has returned to type: the powerful do as they will and the weak suffer as they must.
This world demands prudence and that is an enduring value that this era could learn from the Howard government.
It began with budget discipline. On day one of its tenure, treasurer Peter Costello discovered he had inherited an $11bn deficit, despite the Keating government insisting the books were in surplus. That shortfall was about 2 per cent of GDP. The government took out the razor, made tough choices and two budgets later delivered a surplus. With persistent surpluses, net debt was reduced from 18 per cent of GDP in 1996 to zero a decade later. For a few brief years the commonwealth was worth more than it owed.
Now the budget has a decade of deficits ahead of it and net debt stands at about $620bn, or roughly 21 per cent of GDP. We are in no fit state to deal with a crisis. Budget repair is a national security priority.
And the Howard government understood that defending a nation began with defending its borders. It took a hard line on illegal boat arrivals, insisting that control of Australia’s borders was not a matter of sentiment but sovereignty.
Those decisions were bitterly contested domestically at the time and deplored in the polite parlours of Europe and denounced in the UN. Now most nations understand that deciding who comes to a country and the circumstances in which they come is a bedrock function of the state.
Nations that cannot control their finances can’t afford to defend themselves. Nations that cannot defend their borders risk societal collapse. And energy-poor nations are just poor.

It's the Xian law of the jungle, primal tooth and claw, with the power-mad feasting on the wretched like a lion munching on a lamb.

Now this is the Law of the Jungle — as old and as true as the sky;
And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the Wolf that shall break it must die. 
As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk the Law runneth forward and back —
For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.
Wash daily from nose-tip to tail-tip; drink deeply, but never too deep;
And remember the night is for hunting, and forget not the day is for sleep.
The Jackal may follow the Tiger, but, Cub, when thy whiskers are grown,
Remember the Wolf is a Hunter — go forth and get food of thine own.
Keep peace with the Lords of the Jungle — the Tiger, the Panther, and Bear.
And trouble not Hathi the Silent, and mock not the Boar in his lair.
When Pack meets with Pack in the Jungle, and neither will go from the trail,
Lie down till the leaders have spoken — it may be fair words shall prevail. (The rest here)

Fair words? Prevail?

Not if they've been befouled by the Ughmann.

And so again the pond apologises for presenting reptile talking points without submitting them to the occasional lash, check or balance, but all up that was some twenty minutes of reptile tedium, and there seemed to be no reason to add to the burden.

There have to be gentler ways to begin a weekend.

In the end, it was more than enough to simply complete the climb, so that punters could say, "there, I read that, and now I'll need the weekend to recover."

And in any case, soon enough there'll be an announcement and all will be well, except if you happened to stray into the path of a bomb ...




Friday, March 06, 2026

In which the onion muncher and Our Henry are the pièces de résistance for the day, with sundry apéritif digressions before getting to those two after dinner mints...


 Sound familiar?

For decades, conservative media has thrived on a business model that monetizes outrage and distrust. The more outrageous the claim, the greater the engagement. The more distrust sowed toward institutions — universities, media, elections, public health, the FBI — the more loyal the audience becomes.

That's in a piece about a particular brand of conspiratorial fallout Why right-wing media can’t stop Candace Owens.

... In December, even as Owens was deep into Charlie Kirk assassination trutherism, Erika Kirk was urging TPUSA audiences to be tolerant of disagreeable views. By the time the right decided Owens had gone too far, she had already built a fully independent operation. The movement that once shielded Owens is now discovering that monsters raised on grievance do not recognize fences. The conservative movement no longer has credible gatekeepers. Right-wing media’s fragmentation means that condemnation from established outlets often strengthens, rather than weakens, insurgent figures like Owens. 

But that's true not just of far right American loons. 

It's also true of the lizard Oz, diligently cultivating all sorts of phobias, then wondering why the likes of Barners and Pauline are in now momentum mode.

And yet they remain determinedly clueless about this simple insight: if you hang out with fundamentalist Xians, at some point or another, you're going to end up in Crusader mode ...

...US watchdog Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) said it has received emailed complaints that US service members were told the war with Iran is meant to “cause Armageddon”, or the biblical “end times”.
An unnamed noncommissioned officer wrote in an email to MRFF that a commander had urged officers “to tell our troops that this was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’ and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the Book of Revelation referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ”...
...The officer claimed the commander had told the unit that Trump “has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth”.

Next thing you know we've got some weirdo in the ALP seeking attention by enrolling himself in this new holy roller war (see yesterday's pond).

They're everywhere, and there are a couple of prime examples in this day's lizard Oz.

But before going there, a quick check of the lizard Oz headlines to see what absurdities are being peddled by the reptiles ...



Sure enough, the will of the Iranian people has been miraculously translated into the will of King Donald, who will decide who can rule, while sending in the Kurds just to make sure there's an even greater unholy mess going down ...

At the bottom of the King Donald yarns came news of him taking Ice Barbie out to a quarry and putting her down like a collagen-saturated puppy dog. 

The pond has been told, but can't confirm, that the collagen splatter was enough to keep a thousand beauty shops busy for a thousand years. (Long live the Reich)

No complaints, apparently all this was on the ballot ...



It was left to Joe, lesser member of the Kelly gang, to bring news of the war spiralling out into the world ...



Sheesh, it must be serious, that's the bromancer looking haggard, unshaven and solemn...

Cameron spent time brooding about the Kurds ...

Iran’s new war: Kurds open a second front against regime
CIA-backed Kurds begin ground war against Iran amid US air attacks
CIA-backed Iranian Kurdish fighters have entered northwestern Iran to launch the first ground offensive against the regime as US and Israeli forces clear their way with bombs
By Cameron Stewart



No saucy doubts or fears for triumphalist Cameron, cavorting in glee ...

...US backing for the Iranian Kurds is also laden with risk. Their presence on the border region has always been a source of friction between Tehran and Baghdad, and the Iraqi Kurds have distanced themselves from the Iranian Kurds.
The US is now pressuring the Iraqi Kurds to join forces with the Iranian Kurds against the Iranian regime. But the Iraqi government is opposed to this, fearing retribution from Tehran and from Iran-aligned militia in Iraq.
US military support for the Iranian Kurds is also likely to alarm Recep Erdogan’s government in Turkey and Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government in Syria given that both countries have sizeable Kurdish minorities which they try to keep in check.
Critics say the US backing of the Kurds increases the chances of sectarian civil war or even a regional war.
The US has an uneven relationship with Kurds across the Middle East, allying with them against common enemies such as ISIS, and then abandoning them when circumstances change.
The US has this year ended its former anti-ISIS alliance with the Kurds in northern Syria because it has backed the attempts of the new pro-US al-Sharaa regime to unify the fractured country, ending hopes for a Kurdish homeland.
But in such a hot war with Iran, Washington seems determined to take whatever options it has to help topple the Iranian regime.
The timely alignment of the US and the Iranian Kurds in the common cause of defeating the regime is another blow to the Mullahs in Tehran.

What could possibly go wrong with this "timely alignment"?

Meanwhile, grating Gemma decided that King Donald must be an Iranian woman, and that Iranian women are full Kurd because she suggested asking them if it's worth it (are we asking Saudi Arabian women at the same time?)...

Let’s ask Iran’s women if this reckoning is worth it
The West looked away while Iran’s Women burned. Now, it lectures them on peace
The barbaric reality of Iran’s regime makes an absolute mockery of comfortable Western activists demanding ‘peace’ over liberation.
By Gemma Tognini
Columnist




Speak for yourself garrulous Gemma. 

It really irritates the pond to an unholy level to read these shameless grifters rabbiting on about women's rights, when the entire point of King Donald's regime has been to send women back to being 1950s trad wives, while at the same time abusing the rights of minorities - gays, trans folk, etc - in a way that would make the Taliban or a bunch of mad Iranian Mullahs proud. 

Have a gang of masked men shoot a lesbian in a car? Take out an irritating protestor? Sure thing, it's the mad Mullah way ...

Besides, if King Donald anoints the new ruler, and the Kurds create chaos, the pond bets that Iranian women have a fair chance of becoming Afghani women clones, savouring the charms of being grabbed by the pussy.

Good luck to those unfortunate women, caught between frying pan and fire, and delusional Gemma.

If anyone else were doing the displacing of the mad Mullahs, the pond would live in hope, but this is a mob who turned over Venezuela not to change the regime, but to loot oil and gold.

And so to the hive mind pièce de résistances for the day.

Speaking of religious loons, who should bob up like a bad apple this day but the onion muncher?


The header: Carney’s ‘middle-power diplomacy’ is a rhetorical cop-out; The so-called ‘global rules-based order’ only exists to the extent that America and its allies have successfully intimidated predator nations from challenging it.

The caption: Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney (L) listens to Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese speak during a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra on March 5, 2026. Picture: David Gray, AFP.

Elbows up Canada, if you've put the mad monk's nose out of joint you're doing something right.

The pond realises that correspondents will flee at the presence of the sycophantic, lickspittle Orbán fellow traveller and worshipper, but that's the way it goes.

The pond knew from the get go that five minutes in the company of a war-mongering white Catholic nationalist would be certain to induce nausea, but forget it Jake, it's part of the job description.

Nausea is your friend, nausea is your sign that you retain some connection to a more pleasant world:

From an Australian perspective, the most significant thing about the US attack on Iran is that it does not involve us. Even though Australia is the one country that’s been with the United States in every major conflict, ever since American troops first went into action in the Great War at the Battle of Le Hamel under John Monash’s overall command.
Australia was always there for America – in Korea, in Vietnam, in the first and second Gulf wars, and in Afghanistan – not America’s most important ally but it’s most dependable one – because successive Australian governments realised the leader of the free world had to be supported if freedom were to flourish.
Australia was there when Islamic State burst out of the Syrian desert in mid-2014 and reached the gates of Baghdad: air-dropping supplies to the Yazidis besieged on Mt Sinjar, running guns to the Kurds in Erbil, helping to co-ordinate the liberation of Mosul, rebuilding the Iraqi army at Taji, and flying strike missions across the Middle Eastern war zone.
More recently, following America’s lead, Australia has made modest contributions to arming Ukraine. Yet in all probability, a few tepid words will be Australia’s sole part in the current action against a regime so evil that it routinely slaughters tens of thousands of its own citizens, has manically sought the nuclear weapons needed to annihilate both Israel and America, and has even funded terrorist attacks on our own soil.

The reptiles interrupted with a reminder that there was no point in being too cosy with Canucks who didn't know how to puck, Mark Carney and Anthony Albanese as they arrive for a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra on March 5, 2026. Picture: David Gray, AFP




Inevitably the onion muncher was in war monger mode. There's never been a war he hasn't liked, and many will recall his exceptional service (as a student, as a student!, as an "aggressive terrier", always ready to face charges for common and indecent assault).

But the pond digresses, we're on a war footing ...

The Albanese government’s first response to the joint Israeli-American pre-emptive strike was the Foreign Minister’s call for “de-escalation”; as if decapitating the Islamist tyranny and severely weakening its ability to export terrorism – even if full regime change might not be achieved – was not unambiguously good for the wider world.
Eventually, the Prime Minister said Australia “supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon”, but stressed that Australia had no notice of the attack and “Washington has not requested Australian assistance”, nor did he “anticipate such a request”. Compared to its studied even-handedness between the liberal democratic government of Israel and the Hamas death cult, this was at least belated moral clarity; but it’s typical of the Albanese government that while eventually in favour of the right thing, it won’t lift a finger to bring it about.
It’s hardly surprising that Washington failed to consult Australia given the Albanese government’s ostentatious refusal to use our armed forces for anything other than disaster relief and its reluctance to call out Islamist extremism.
In December 2023, the government’s refusal to send a frigate to help enforce freedom of navigation in the Red Sea was the first time since the ANZUS alliance was forged in 1951 that Australia has turned down an American request for military help. At the time, there were five frigates and destroyers docked at Sydney’s Garden Island naval base. Either they could not safely be deployed, lacked crew, or – more likely – the government did not want to upset the Islamist lobby here in Australia by deploying them against Iran’s Houthi allies.
That we were neither asked for help nor advised of what was coming speaks volumes for Australia’s shrinking stature in the wider world. This of the country that sent 330,000 men overseas in the Great War and then put almost a million into uniform 25 years on, in order to help preserve democratic freedoms.

At this point the pond introduced a distraction from the war mongering, and who could blame them. 

It came in this form ... The Front: Can Iran really close the Persian Gulf?

Instead of making the hive mind listen, the reptiles decided to provide a transcript. (The number of clicks must have been diabolical):




The pond can understand why the reptiles would want to distract from the onion muncher, but it's in the intermittent archive, and the pond must return to the low road ...

‘America is winning’: Democrats ‘miserable’ at Trump’s resounding success in Iran warSky News Digital Presenter Gabriella Power claims the Democrats are “mad” President Donald Trump is winning in the war against Iran. “It’s been so painful to listen to the Democrats being so miserable after Ayatollah Khamenei was killed,” she said. “We’ve been seeing Iranians celebrating right around the world.”
Our government had enough inkling of what was about to happen to remove non-essential staff from our Middle Eastern embassies and to issue travel warnings – but not enough gumption to call the Americans to offer the assistance that a decent ally should have been ready to provide.
The same command-and-control aircraft, aerial refuellers and strike fighters that did so much to defeat Islamic State should have been volunteered again.
Quite apart from the fact that they would have been engaged in making the world safer for free peoples everywhere, they would have been acquiring priceless operational experience, and cementing Australia’s value as a friend and ally. Donald Trump’s scornful gibe at Britain’s PM that “he’s no Winston Churchill”, so far, might equally be deployed against our own, who’s no Billy Hughes.
Let’s hope he might yet emulate John Curtin, the World War I pacifist who eventually mobilised the whole country to fight against Germany and Japan. And while Sir Keir Starmer has shamefully run down Britain’s armed forces, at least Royal Air Force jets have now engaged Iranian drones in the Gulf, a Royal Navy ship is being deployed to the Mediterranean, and British bases are finally being made available to US forces.

How weird did it get? The reptiles flung in a snap of the man whom the onion muncher thought constituted some sort of clever jibe... Former PM William “Billy” Hughes




Well might it be said that the onion muncher is no Archbishop Daniel Mannix ...




And so to the war with China, preferably by Xmas ...

Meanwhile, our contribution to global freedom is deploying consular officials to the Middle East to organise an exodus of frightened expats; plus reassuring assumed-to-be-terminally-timid voters that an Iranian strike on Dubai’s al-Minhad air base caused no casualties among the Australian personnel there.
The Albanese government is fond of flagging defence initiatives but almost all of them are spending money in the far distant future or supposedly creating jobs in Australia rather than actually boosting our fighting strength now. Other than three air warfare destroyers we have no serious anti-missile defences plus almost no drone or counter-drone capability, even though the Ukraine conflict has made it obvious how central this is to modern war-fighting. Everything is about political management rather than real national security
It’s crystal clear where this is leading. When the US eventually asks us – as it inevitably will – to join in contingency planning against a Communist Chinese assault on democratic Taiwan, the Albanese government wants to be able to say that we’d like to help but can’t. Or that we could and would but only in a decade’s time when, or if, we finally get the AUKUS subs. It’s pacifism disguised as forward planning. Even though becoming an economic colony of Beijing would be the ultimate fate of an Australia without solid alliances. Perhaps that’s what some in the Albanese government would actually prefer to any readiness to fight for ourselves and our like-minded partners.

Or we could position ourselves well ...



Next came a snap of the puppet master with his puppet, Donald Trump shakes hands with Benjamin Netanyahu during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago, Dec. 29, 2025, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)



Time for a final bout of triumphalism, with echoes of Afghanistan ringing in the pond's ears:

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s talk of “middle-power diplomacy”, reiterated in our own parliament on Thursday, is no more than a rhetorical cop-out to cover the green left’s phobia against having and, if needs be, using the force that’s vital to support our national values and interests.
After all, any rule of law worthy of the name requires a democratic parliament to make it, impartial judges to administer it, and – most importantly – honest police to enforce it. The so-called “global rules-based order” only exists to the extent that America and its allies have successfully intimidated predator nations from challenging it. Notwithstanding his mockery of Canada as the 51st state, and verbal bullying of Denmark over Greenland, Trump is actually doing far more to uphold it than any recent president. In an imperfect world, better a flawed man doing good things than better ones doing nothing.
The current attempt to destroy forever the Iranian theocracy’s nuclear cravings will make the world safer, fairer and better – yet the shameful, humiliating reality is that Australia is doing nothing practical to bring it about.

Ah yes ...


And so to the hole in bucket man, offering a variation on same:



The header: Starmer’s betrayal of US dismantles Churchill’s legacy; On the eightieth anniversary of Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech that proposed the ‘special relationship’, Starmer’s grubby politics are an insult to the memory of Britain’s greatest prime minister.

The caption: Winston Churchill giving his famous "Iron Curtain" speech in Missouri in 1946. Picture: Supplied

Interesting factoid ... "iron curtain" had a long history, way back to Queen Elisabeth of Belgium in 1914, before that artful rip off merchant made it his own ...

As for the rest, another five minutes of wasted life, and yet it's the pond's duty, though the pond does think it should provide a link to Our Henry's ranting in the intermittent archive.

Why? Well second par into the piece Our Henry makes reference to the way that Churchill was struggling with exhaustion.

Any sensible reader might think clicking on the link would lead to some further insight into Churchill's struggles.

Instead it led to another bog standard reptile outing, which began this way ...



You see? Nothing to do with Churchill's struggles, all to do with keeping punters inside the hive mind.

Once you've booked into the Hotel Emeritus Chairman, you can never leave.

In much the same way, this week Henry cultists can forget references to ancient Roman and Greek times, and Thucydides and all that jazz.

This week it's the British Empire Times.

Now read on, but feel free to leave at any time ...

Eighty years ago, on March 5, 1946, Winston Churchill delivered what he considered “the most important speech” of his career at a small college in Fulton, Missouri. The invitation had come through president Harry Truman, who added a handwritten postscript to the letter from Westminster College’s president: “This is a wonderful school in my home state. Hope you can do it. I’ll introduce you.”
At the time, Churchill was struggling with exhaustion and the shock of electoral defeat. Yet the prospect of speaking before, and thus directly to, the president of the United States – an occasion certain to attract the world’s press – proved irresistible.
In the event, Churchill’s lecture lived up to his ambition of “starting some thinking that would make history” – thinking he believed was desperately needed. The war had accelerated a longer-term shift toward a bipolar world order. By its end, the United States and the Soviet Union each had between 11 and 12 million men and women under arms; the collapse of Germany, together with the devastation of most of Europe, had brought these vast forces into direct confrontation on the continent itself.

The reptiles interrupted with a snap of that man, Keir Starmer speaking during prime minister's questions in the House of Commons in London on March 4, 2026. Picture: Jessica Taylor, AFP.




Our Henry seized the moment to revert to cold war warrior type ...

Yet many Americans still seemed gripped, perhaps not unreasonably, by illusions about the Soviet regime. There was, after all, no doubting the scale of the Soviet contribution to the Allied victory: between June 1941 and June 1944, fully 93 per cent of German Army battle casualties were inflicted by the Red Army. Moreover, all three Allied leaders – Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Churchill himself – held Stalin in high regard. And powerful sections of the Democratic Party remained firmly committed to the Soviet-American alliance.
Churchill, however, had long harboured serious doubts about the USSR’s intentions. In a little-known episode, he had, in May 1945, instructed his military planners to draw up plans for “Operation Unthinkable”, which would “impose upon Russia the will of the United States and British empire” so as to secure “a square deal for Poland”: a deal that respected Stalin’s commitments at Yalta.
Those plans were quietly shelved as unrealistic. But by early 1946, when the Fulton speech was drafted, the United States had acquiesced in a Polish government entirely subject to Soviet control. At the same time, the American army was rapidly demobilising, creating a vacuum the Soviets were certain to exploit. Plainly, a reality check was required.
The statement that earned the speech its enduring fame – “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent” – sprang directly from those concerns. Churchill had in fact used “iron curtain” several times before, both in the House of Commons and in a telegram to Truman; the Fulton speech vaulted it to world attention.
But no less important, in Churchill’s mind, was the accompanying warning: that when confronted by an ideology virulently hostile to Western civilisation, it was moral cowardice to respond “by a policy of appeasement”. He had seen the danger before: “Last time I saw it all coming and cried aloud to my own fellow countrymen and to the world, but no one paid any attention.” The result was that “we were all sucked into the awful whirlpool”. “We surely must not let that happen again.”

Any thoughts about Vlad the Sociopath, Ukraine, and King Donald wanting to feed Ukrainians to the little fishes so he can make out like a Vlad-loving bandit? Any mention of state Russian media suddenly getting antsy about the way things are heading?Any note on the way they've now got the cheek to ask the Ukrainians for help!?

Nah, not a single word!

Instead, just have a period snap ...Copy pic of the handshake between Winston Churchill (L), Harry S Truman and Josef Stalin (R) infront of Churchill's residence in Potsdam, Germany 23/07/1945.



Amazing in a way that Our Henry could ignore Ukraine's current predicament, and yet, also entirely typical, a man so clueless all he can do is revert to blathering about Gladstone...

Yet Churchill insisted that the “crux” of the speech lay in the means by which a peace worth having could be secured and maintained: through a “fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples”, founded on “a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and empire and the United States” – a relationship that would, in the words of his speech’s title, forge “The Sinews of Peace”.
Like “iron curtain”, Churchill had already invoked the need for a post-war “special relationship”; the novelty lay less in the proposal than in its implication that the United Nations would not suffice to assure the freedoms for which millions had died.
“There is,” he said, “nothing (the Russians) admire more than strength, and nothing for which they have less respect than weakness.” Peace had to rest on a credible threat of force, which the proposed trans-Atlantic alliance would provide.
Unsurprisingly, Joseph Stalin, in a rare Pravda interview, immediately denounced the speech as a “call to war”. As for what he called its “racist” premise – that the English-speaking peoples, “being the only valuable nations, should rule over the remaining nations of the world” – it “reminded (him) remarkably of Hitler”.
And unsurprisingly too, the “progressive” wing of the Democrats, along with the Soviet-aligned “peace movement”, echoed Stalin’s criticisms, and ensured that Churchill was greeted in New York by angry demonstrators chanting “Winnie, Winnie, go away – UNO is here to stay”.
However, Churchill had fully absorbed Gladstone’s six “right principles of foreign policy”. Central among them was the proposition that when fundamental moral principles were at stake “we shall look to the co-operation of the Powers of civilised Europe. But if every chance of obtaining co-operation is exhausted, the work will be undertaken by the single power of England”.
Gladstone’s maxim, as historian David Reynolds put it, was “Internationally if possible; unilaterally if necessary”: what mattered was countering threats, as Gladstone had when he sent an army to Egypt in 1882. That was, Churchill believed, the maxim that had to guide the West in dealing with the USSR – Stalin had to know that aggression would not go unpunished, if necessary, by the Anglo-American alliance acting alone.
It is therefore hard to fault Donald Trump’s remark that Sir Keir Starmer is “no Winston Churchill”. The refusal to allow the United States to use Diego Garcia is not merely unprecedented; it is perhaps the most serious blow to the “special relationship” in its long history.

The pond hopes that Ukraine feels full as a goog on Gladstone, because that's about all they're going to get from Our Henry and King Donald, US President Donald Trump delivers the first State of the Union address of his second term to a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber of the United States Capitol in Washington, DC, on February 24, 2026. Picture: Kenny Holston, AFP.




Our Henry decided he'd end with a full flourish of war monger ...

The Americans may have been misled in the 1956 Suez crisis, but Britain’s actions did not constrain America’s decisions; and Harold Wilson never gave any assurances, explicit or implicit, that Britain would participate in the Vietnam War. In contrast, Diego Garcia was created as part of the broader bargain struck, in the late 1960s, when it became apparent that Britain would abandon any sustained military presence east of Suez. Built at American expense, the base’s specific purpose was to ensure the US had secure access and unhindered operational freedom, precisely because it would be less vulnerable to domestic political pressure than bases in Southeast Asia or the Gulf.
Together with Spain’s similar refusal, Starmer’s gesture will only deepen Washington’s conviction that strategic bases cannot depend on allied goodwill but must be sited on territories the United States owns and controls – Greenland among them.

So now it's all Starmer's fault that King Donald is an imperialist of the first water? Ye ancient cats and nineteenth century great powers dogs...

Nor is there any mystery about Starmer’s real motives. Crippled by poor judgment and endless errors, his prime ministership hangs by a thread; the Labour right is a spent force, leaving the party in the hands of the left, which has always despised the Anglo-American alliance; and the Islamists, with their vitriolic hatred of the US and Israel, have an ever more potent electoral impact, as last month’s by-election in Gorton and Denton, a decades-long Labour stronghold, starkly showed.
This is, in other words, a political calculation as grubby as it is reckless. Yes, Donald Trump may be no Harry Truman. But that cannot excuse betraying a partnership that, despite every disagreement and strain, has helped form “the sinews of peace” – exactly as Churchill had hoped, when he warned the West against appeasing its implacable enemies, eighty years ago.

Donald Trump may be no Harry Truman?

Amen to that ...




That doesn't explain why we should get in to bed with a narcissistic man child off on assorted ventures as a way of avoiding any Trumpstein files fallout.

On the other hand, speaking of implacable enemies, we must never give up the chance to murder a few schoolkids by sending hellfire down on them. 

It's the Our Henry, onion munching way ...



Good news for Iranian girls, eh, grating Gemma? Talk about liberation, a full on liberation from the land of the living.

And so to a final note on the way the hive mind works to keep everyone inside the hotel for ever ...

At the very end of Our Henry's piece, he proposed by way of aside and link, that "Donald Trump may be no Harry Truman."

Click on the link , and you'll end up here, in a singularity ...




What's so singular about that distraction, that link?

There's not a single mention of Harry Truman! Let alone him not being a pathetic wannabe King.

Go on, do a word search. See if you can find a reference to Truman.

It's fraud, plain and simple, all designed to keep gormless punters inside the hive mind.

What a relief to turn to the infallible Pope for a jolly way to end this early morning outing ...