imaging being with someone you've waited 14 billion years or so to be with
and you just might be starting to understand the magnitude of the situation...
Maybe,
Romans 8:29
For those whom He foreknew,
He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son...
You know...
My gurl aint so obvious about things :-).
Besides the S10 needs be washed and waxed, etc.
I love you baby.
You're the greatest sweetheart.
How Big A Problem Is America’s Shrinking Oil Reserve?
"President Biden has announced steps to replenish the SPR, “likely after FY2023”, and in my opinion most likely after the 2024 elections. President Biden’s gamble to deplete the SPR in order to fight high oil prices may not hurt him at all. Of course, if for some reason we had a true supply emergency and found ourselves needing that oil, it would be looked upon as a terrible decision."
gonna be a huge problem here soon.
"if for some reason we had a true supply emergency and found ourselves needing that oil"
Like wars on two fronts with Russia and China maybe?
Geez Louise what dont people understand?
of all?
Any other time we have ever had two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth?
We have said were in a recession.
Steve Hanke says the chance of a U.S. recession just shot up to 80%
Were already there.
"He blamed the U.S. central bank for rising inflation. “The reason for that is because the Fed exploded the money supply, starting early 2020 at an unprecedented rate and they don’t want this length to be visible between the money supply and inflation.”
(Said it was exactly what we wee gonna do at the very onset of COVID. I look like a "professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University"?)
"They have really been searching for inflation and the causes of inflation in all the wrong places. They’re looking at everything under the sun, but the money supply."
(Who does that sound like?)
“And in fact, they’ve (The Fed) doubled and tripled down on the argument that money has no relationship to economic activity or not a reliable relationship to economic activity and inflation.”
(Brainiacs...)
“The reason for that is because the Fed exploded the money supply, starting early 2020 at an unprecedented rate and they don’t want this length to be visible between the money supply and inflation.”
“Because if it is, the noose around their neck, and that’s the real problem.”
An increase in money supply drives up prices as consumers are willing to pay more for goods."
(Completely wrong Mrs. Su-Lin Tan! Increasing the $ supply doesn't make consumers willing to pay more for goods, it cheapens the value of the $ they have to where it cost more to buy the same products and services before the $ supply was increased. I swear I think these articles are just AI driven bots pushing an agenda lots of times anymore and I'll show you why:
"Su-Lin Tan is a Senior Correspondent with CNBC, based in Singapore.
With over 25 years of experience in business, including time as a former investment banker and analyst, Su-Lin joined CNBC after the Australian Financial Review and the South China Morning Post.
She has covered business and financial news, housing and commercial property, street talk and investigations, as well as trade and conflicts and the macroeconomy.
Su-Lin is a qualified accountant who worked in the financial services sector in London and Sydney before becoming a journalist."
She's got that background?
And she doesn't understand that to much of anything decreases its value? Even to much $v in the system?
US, allies pledge to punish Putin over Ukraine in UN showdown
“The very international order that we have gathered here to uphold is being shredded before our eyes. We cannot, we will not allow President Putin to get away with it.”
(The new catch phrase, "International order".
Maybe we shredded it when we KNOWINGLY invaded Iraq under false pretenses?
Just a thought.
If we hadn't done that do you think Putin would be so emboldened to act like he is currently?
in the presence of others?
This is exactly what you will get told in response.
Tread lightly would be my advice.
That and:
"Apparently God almighty didn't care as much about it as you do."
You see, there is a new chapter coming and its called:
I so 100% completely agree with him on this.
"Growing up in one of the poorest zip codes in one of the most impoverished states in America, Booker said a major focus of his campaign is addressing poverty, which affects hundreds of thousands of Kentuckians, white and Black."
(I always told my son, "look at the candidates background before you make a decision on whether or not to vote for them. It says a lot about who they are as a person.")
"While Booker is unifying in his message, he is also not shy to call out his Republican opponent. The Democrat said Paul, the son of a former U.S. congressman and physician, “doesn’t understand” the economic hardships that he and other Kentuckians have endured.
“He is someone who is essentially a privileged, spoiled brat,” said Booker. “He doesn’t think he belongs or is responsible to anyone. He doesn’t see the struggles that we face because he hasn’t lived them. And quite honestly, he has sold us out.”
(Ask yourself this:
"If Rand Paul, didn't have "Paul" as a last name? And he didn't have daddy's (Ron Paul) donor list from Texas? Would he have ever gotten elected to the senate? Or would he be just another eye doctor from Bowling Green?"
Whether you like him or not you know the answer to that question. I haven't ever liked the guy largely for the reasons I just listed above. Same with Trump. If daddy never gave him any of his $? Would you have ever even heard of the guy?"
All the grandstanding he (Paul) does and has done since he started his political career just to make a name for himself and be in the headlines just makes me wanna puke.
still some more.
Take Putin’s Nuclear Threat Seriously, But Not Too Seriously
Few think the Russian leader would be foolish enough to escalate radically, but there’s also a strong argument to be made that he’s not bluffing.
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has raised anew the possibility he might use nuclear weapons against Ukraine to prevail in a conflict going sideways. The smart money says he won’t, because doing so — or otherwise expanding the conflict drastically — wouldn’t make a bad situation any better."
"Yet the smart money might not have predicted the choices that set Putin down this path in the first place."
(Thats exactly what I was saying the other day, the people that told you he wouldn't invade? Are the same ones telling you now that he wont use a tactical nuke. (1 Thessalonians 5:3).
"His goal, presumably, is to stem the erosion of Russia’s military position, and then use the threat of escalation to impose a diplomatic solution."
(When are we gonna learn that they just don't think like we think? That they just don't act like we act? That kinda thinking is imposing our values on their actions and it's just not in the cards hypersonic arsenal or not.)
"Would Putin carry through on the threat? In Washington and other Western capitals, there are two schools of thought."
"Optimists believe Putin won’t use nuclear weapons because doing so wouldn’t really help him. So-called battlefield nuclear weapons work best against large masses of troops or tanks, but the fighting in Ukraine is fairly dispersed. Holding territory or cities that have just been hit with nuclear weapons isn’t an attractive proposition; the prospect that fallout might blow back into Russia makes nuclear use less alluring still."
(It would surely help him draw US into a conflict we don't want and cant afford)
Putin might still use nuclear weapons to reset the conflict psychologically — to shock Kyiv and Washington into de-escalation. Yet that could simply cause the US and its allies to double down in Ukraine, perhaps directly entering the conflict themselves, because doing otherwise would create a horrendous precedent that revisionist powers can simply nuke their way out of failed wars.
(He has the advantage and he knows it it's why he's acting like he is.)
Pessimists aren’t so sure Putin is bluffing, because using nuclear weapons might not actually backfire. Some unknown portion of the international community would become desperate to end the fighting immediately, even at the cost of making concessions to Moscow. The US and its allies would have few attractive options in response.
that our country also has various means of destruction, and some components are more modern than those of the NATO countries,” Putin added.
He wasn't talking about nukes. he was talking about his hypersonic arsenal. He's not afraid to start ww3 because he has technology we do not have and that we have no defense for. He's not afraid to start WW3 because he believes he can win it.
Putin is trying to raise the stakes in Ukraine. Here's what it means
"Seven months on, Putin's language was if anything even darker than in the early hours of February 24. Then, he warned the West that Russia would respond immediately to those who stood in its way, with consequences that "will be such as you have never seen in your entire history."
(The day the Russians put Hypersonics in Kaliningrad?...I just hung my head thinking...Oh good Lord here we go. He wouldn't have put them there if he wasn't planning on using them. And the type he put there? Designed to take out NATO missile defense systems. I was working with a volunteer group I work with from time to time and Brother Brian saw my mind drifting off and he asked "Whats on your mind brother?" I said, "Are you really sure you want to know?" We both just smiled. I told him about the fact that Russia had just put those type of missiles there and what they were designed for and said "it's about to get real." he just looked like..OMGoodness...and we went on building our wheelchair ramp :-).
(How hard is this for all these so called "experts" to understand? If you had technology your adversaries didn't have? And not only that but they don't have a defense for it either? How likely would you be to go to the negotiating table? I've said all along they were all in from the get go, Hypersonics, Nukes, whatever it takes.)
"Alexander Baunov at the Carnegie Endowment puts it bluntly. In a series of tweets before Putin's speech, he wrote that the message to Ukraine's allies is this: "You chose to fight us in Ukraine, now try to fight us in Russia itself, or, to be precise what we call Russia."
(That is 100% correct. You're not gonna hit us on "Russia proper" so to speak? Then we will just change what we consider to be part of Russia to get our desired aim." And why was there this concerted effort at the UN about UNITY? If we and are allies are so united? Why do we have to keep talking about it so much? You wait and see, Europe will have the worst winter in 40 years and when Germany runs out of gas? Yeah...what do you think they are gonna do?)
"Baunov believes the objective is to turn Russia's invasion of a neighboring country into a defensive war, a distinction that would "make the conflict more legitimate in the eyes of ordinary Russians, leaving the Kremlin free to make whatever decisions and take whatever measures it deems necessary."
(Again, I completely agree, he's been wanting a fight for a long time now and he is gonna do whatever he needs to to insure that he gets it. Look how the Russian people are responding, you don't think they know what is coming down the pike?)
"Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that some 300,000 reservists would be available.
"These are not some people who have never heard of the army," Shoigu said. "These are those who have served, have a military registration specialty, have had military experience."
The mobilization is limited, perhaps so as not to alienate public opinion, perhaps to leave room for further moves down the road. Shoigu claimed: "Those who have served and have a military specialty are almost 25 million."
(If it was a "full scale invasion" like were being told here recently? Wouldn't there have been a call up of reservist somewhere along the way before now? As for why the mobilization is limited? Yeah, to leave options further down the line. They don't need any more, regardless of what we are being told.)
"But Russia's reliance on Chechen units, volunteer battalions, militia from Luhansk and Donetsk and even convicts recruited by the private military contractor Wagner belies the claim that there is a ready supply of veterans to head to the front-line."
(That is just complete, utter nonsense. If you were aiming for a fight with the US and its allies? And you know you have a built in advantage they don't have? And that they don't have a defense for? Would you use your best troops and equipment up front in the beginning? Or save them for later? The guy has been sandbagging from the get go and all these experts and think tank wanna bes are about to find that out.)
"So far, Lieven told CNN, "Putin's strategies have overwhelmingly failed, both in terms of military progress on the ground and economic pressure on the West to seek compromise with Russia."
(If he was gonna compromise? He never would have invaded. You can forget compromise. This conflict has been in the works since the end of ww2. Patton knew it would happen someday it's why he wanted to just go ahead and invade Russia after the fall of Berlin. To think there's not going to be a global conflict here shortly I think is pretty much a fools folly at this time. It's here, this is the age we are living in.)
"Schmidt also believes there is little risk that Putin would turn to tactical nuclear weapons, "because that will bring in NATO for real and he would lose the Russian military, the source of his power."
(That is faulty logic and a huge mistake to make. Lets say he does use a tactical nuke in Ukraine and we respond in a limited manner like somebody was saying on the point of origin of the attack? What happens when he hits London in 210 seconds with a hypersonic? Or Berlin? Or Paris? or Washington? Or Wall Street? Or all of them at the same time? How are your armies gonna coordinate anything when your capitols are devastated? All these freaking "experts" are acting like "Well he cant do this" and they are just flat out 100% wrong and are completely ignoring his hypersonic arsenal. We are past the days of mutually assured destruction like we had when I was growing up. One side has a distinct advantage and its not US.
"Efforts to contain Russia have failed, face it"
Putin 2018
He is not scared to go to war with US, NATO, anybody and its because of the hypersonic (nuclear or not) technology he has and ignoring this "is faulty logic and a huge mistake to make.)
"To some observers, the formal absorption of parts of Ukraine into the Russian Federation risks making any negotiated end to the Ukraine conflict -- however distant that may already seem -- near impossible."
(Negotiation has never been in the cards, ever, you can forget about it. Like I said, if you had a technology that the other side didn't have and didn't have a defense for? You would negotiate?)
U.S. has sent private warnings to Russia against using a nuclear weapon
"The United States for several months has been sending private communications to Moscow warning Russia’s leadership of the grave consequences that would follow the use of a nuclear weapon, according to U.S. officials, who said the messages underscore what President Biden and his aides have articulated publicly."
(Why would we be doing that if we didn't think he actually might use one? He's not scared of any consequences.)
"...a senior U.S. official said the communication has been happening consistently over recent months."
(Ya know? Ya keep backing somebody in a corner for decades? You might not ought be surprised when they finally come out swinging.)
"To defend that annexed land, Medvedev (Dmitry Medvedev deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council) said, Russia is able to use not only its newly mobilized forces, but also “any Russian weapon, including strategic nuclear ones and those using new principles,” a reference to hypersonic weapons.)
“Russia has chosen its path,” Medvedev added. “There is no way back.”
(They are just not scared or intimidated in the least by NATO, US etc. They are getting ready for war and we are like please, "DON'T, DON'T, DON'T".)
"Whereas previous Kremlin statements appeared to be aimed at warning the United States and its allies against going too far in helping Ukraine, Putin’s most recent comments suggested Russia is considering using a nuclear weapon on the battlefield in Ukraine to freeze gains and force Kyiv and its backers into submission, said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, a nonproliferation advocacy group in Washington.
“What everyone needs to recognize is that this is one of, if not the most, severe episodes in which nuclear weapons might be used in decades,” Kimball said. “The consequences of even a so-called ‘limited nuclear war’ would be absolutely catastrophic.”
(Finally somebody is saying exactly whats up. You can pretty much count on them being used at this point, keep in mind we don't have a treaty with Ukraine, it is not in NATO etc. This was never about Ukraine but rather more about everything else, ending the $ role as worlds reserve currency, increasing inflation, breaking the financial backs of Europe and US, ending the UN, the IMF, the World Bank etc. Everybody who ever thought the post ww2 world would just go on forever like it has been raise your hands...
exactly.)
In an interview with CBS News’s “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday, Biden was asked what he would tell Putin if the Russian leader is considering using nuclear weapons in the conflict against Ukraine. “Don’t. Don’t. Don’t,” Biden said. “You will change the face of war unlike anything since World War II.”
(He's gonna and Dont Dont Dont aint gonna stop him. We have know he might for sometime or we wouldn't have been sending private messages warning them not to. "We have been extraordinarily lucky so far," Antonio Guterres (UN SEC General) said. Amid rising global tensions, "humanity is just one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear annihilation" That was Aug 1st. I said then he knew what was going on in regard to Ukraine and nukes. Why else would he have said it if he didn't know their use was likely imminent?)
"Any direct military U.S. response against Russia would risk the possibility of a wider war between nuclear-armed superpowers — the avoidance of which the Biden administration has made its No. 1 priority in all of its Ukraine policymaking."
(Again, one side is gearing up for war, the other side is rehearing for hypersonic misssile attacks and saying please no, don't)
“If it’s Russian forces in Ukraine that launched the nuclear attack, the United States could strike directly against those forces,” Kroenig (Matthew Kroenig, a professor of government at Georgetown University and director of the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council) said. “It would be calibrated to send a message that this is not a major war coming, this is a limited strike. If you are Putin, what do you do in response? I don’t think you immediately say let’s launch all the nukes at the United States.”
(I agree, see comment above on hypersonic attacks on London, Berlin, Washington, New York etc...Putin's response would be, (and I have been saying this for sometime, my buddy at the detention center could tell you as much) "I showed restraint in not using my nuclear capability against you, if you want to go down the path to mutually assured destruction? Thats your decision, not mine." Meanwhile China is eyeing Taiwan.)
"But even a limited conventional strike by the U.S. military against Russia would be viewed as reckless by many in Washington, who would argue against risking a full-scale war with a nuclear-armed Russia."
(I agree, the fact is there are simply no good options to any of the myriad of crisis the world faces, least of all this one. It ought to be telling you just what time we are living in.)
“If he was really thinking very seriously about using nuclear weapons very imminently, he almost certainly would want us to know that,” Acton ( James M. Acton, co-director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace) said. “He would much rather threaten nuclear use and have us make concessions than actually have to go down the path of nuclear use.”
("he almost certainly would want us to know that". These people, I just wanna smack em. Its why I live in a garage :-) JUST HOW MANY TIMES DOES HE HAVE TO TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT HE IS GOING TO DO BEFORE YOU WAKE UP AND BELIEVE HIM? Apparently we believe him or we wouldn't have been sending private communications warning of consequences if he does use tactical nukes and apparently the UN Sec General believes him or he wouldn't have said what he did. These experts in their ivory towers are about to get a wake up call. Lots of experts didn't think Hilter was gonna invade Poland either but I forget I'm living in a country where these days over half the populace cant name the three branches of our government, so expecting anybody to know anything about world history would seem to be a stretch at this point. I've made plenty of comments about an arrogant, uninformed, apathetic populace eventually getting whats coming to it, but I digress.)
Godspeed everybody.
It's about to get real indeed.
I love you baby :-).
Told my Buddy about a chore we need to take care of soon and he says:
"We can do it Monday probably."
Los Amigos looses a cook and I told them I could help them out for a while and they said:
"Sunday at 12."
Not to mention his wife didn't seem to be all that excited about having some help :-).
Kinda telling :-).
Lil bit.
Interesting also everything is after Saturday this weekend don't ya think?
You really gonna try and convince me Tues visiting my buddy at the detention center wasn't all pre-planed? My buddy asked how he was doing and I said:
"Better than I would be if I was in his situation"
and his lil smirk pretty much gave that all away :-).
And I would dare say the individual who gave me a ride up there that day pretty much knows what has been done for his brother and sister in law...
YUP.
I love you baby.
And why are we going to Washington and who exactly are we gonna meet with?
Were gonna be going and visiting Brother Joe anyway right?
:-).
87 countries out of 195 if you're keeping track at home.
Mapped: 87 countries condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the UN
just wanna make sure I got this right?
Putin issues a "partial mobilization" of experienced reservist,
but it was supposedly a "full scale invasion" of Ukraine?
Gotta love those "full scale invasions" where the invading country hardly uses their far superior air force/air superiority.
I'm sorry, come again with that?
.svg%20(1).png)
.svg.png)
