Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

On the Necessity of Bearing Witness

By

On November 11, 2025

Comments

Some stories are too difficult to tell in the hours, days or weeks after you experience them. Over time, however, they fester; begging to be told; becoming more insistent as the months and years pass. Some even begin to haunt a writer more and more, day by day until the tale must be told. Last night’s nightmare compels me to relate my tale now.

In late November of 2008 my bus from Vietnam to Siem Reap developed issues and required a stopover in the Cambodian capital, Phnom Penh. It had been a sleeper bus so we were told we’d have a full day in the capital and the bus would leave the next day. Traveling plans like war plans rarely survive contact with the road. Growing ever more patient with detours, I inspected my guidebook, back when using Lonely Planet’s was a thing, and planned my day.

Let me be clear: I am no fan of war or atrocity porn, but I do understand its allure, although I am, thankfully, largely immune to it. On the other hand and possibly more importantly, I also recognize and empathize with the need to preserve places where truly reprehensible atrocities of human history occurred. They are to be preserved that future generations witness, feel, and have the opportunity to comprehend even the smallest portion of the enormity that took place underfoot. Maybe, just maybe, such lessons might be passed on to others who will never be able, or be allowed, to experience such hallowed ground.

Many practicing and secular Jews make pilgrimages to sites where the Shoah occurred. I’ve inquired why and each query has been answered universally. They describe a compulsion to bear witness, to honor the fallen, that they remain alive in living memory. Hard to argue with. Because the Armenian genocide occurred in a more dispersed manner Armenian pilgrims face much more significant hurdles. But, when possible Armenians likewise honor their ancestors. I cannot speak to what happened in Rwanda in 1994. I am aware of such places in Guatemala, heard in faint whispers where no gringos are welcome, nor visit, quite understandably.

How to explain how my choices that day were made? I may have only been 13 years-old but the 1984 movie ‘the Killing Fields’ left me with a powerful impression. An impression I recalled that November day and I felt oddly, inexplicably, duty-bound to see what I did not want to see. The killing fields were not my first stop that day however. That honor (poor word choice, I know) fell to the former interrogation and torture center of the Pol Pot Regime’s perceived enemies Tuol Sleng. Here I endured, what I can only describe as a feeling of almost unbearable witness to sickening crimes.

Two examples will suffice.

First, in one room of the prison sat a metal frame bed where regime “enemies” were restrained. Once restrained, electrical leads were attached to the frame. Most expired for no reason at all. Sometimes the guards just left the room to have a smoke. At others they left to eat lunch. But most often the guards let them die because they knew no questions they might ask would be satisfactorily answered. They knew they were killing regular people, completely innocent.

The second example is this photo, a photo that haunts me to this day. The walls of Tuol Sleng are papered with them, all of them innocent and to this day they go unnamed. If you cannot feel the fear radiating from this photo you are devoid of the empathy gene.

In all I spent about two hours wandering through Tuol Sleng. I will never return.

But, my day was far from over. After walking out of Tuol Sleng I hailed a tuk-tuk and asked him to take me to the killing fields, which are about two kilometers outside of Phnom Penh. What I recall most vividly about this horrifying place was the care I had to take where I walked. (NOTE: click on the following links at your own risk.) The ground was uneven and I was told at the entrance to stay on the high ground, as the sunken spaces were mass graves. Christ, I shudder visualizing it even now. Then there were what I can only describe as large glass cases, best suited as terrariums for large pythons or boa constrictors. Each case was filled with one of the following: femurs of the dead, human ulnae and radii, and hip bones. Piling Pelion on top of Ossa, mason jars filled with human teeth sat atop each glass case. Finally, the Cambodians being Buddhists made a four story glass stupa—a Buddhist reliquary—filled with human skulls.

Towards the end of my increasingly heavy-hearted meanderings I noted crimson rays filling the sky. I hailed a cab to my hotel, shambled up to my room, slouched off my backpack and sank onto the bed, sighing deeply from emotional exhaustion. I didn’t know what I felt—except despair. I walked downstairs and asked where the nearest bar was. Now, I am not one to drink alone; but, I confess that I was incapable of dealing with what I was feeling at the time. So, I sat down, alone and in silence and got drunk. Not tipsy, but drunk. I barely recall making it back to my room, but I did. The last thing I recall thinking before I passed out was, “I’m going to be haunted by this for a long time.”

The next morning after dreamless sleep, no ghosts woke me up. All that greeted me were overcast skies, a wicked hangover and my noon bus ticket to Seam Reap.

It’s Difficult To Overstate How Concentrated Wealth Is In The US

By

On November 10, 2025

Comments

These two charts tell a story. First, the top .1%.

Next, the top 1%. This chart is only to 2023.

Now what you’ll notice is that the top .1% holds about half the wealth of the top 1%.

It’s like this all thru the economy. Everything is flowing to the top, because that’s how the economy is set up. This is sheer insanity, among other things, especially when combined with AI sucking up jobs, its likely to lead to a demand depression. Most rich people don’t get, but a few are waking up.

Meanwhile Trump just went to the Supreme Court to not pay for SNAP food aid. “Starve, peons!” History tells us that food riots are the greatest danger to rulers and it doesn’t take long for them to happen.

As I said before, there is only ONE issue now. Cost of living. People keep telling me Zohran style policies can’t win outside of NYC. Well…

And the Republicans have a shutdown going to make health care even more unaffordable.

Crazed.

Things are going to start changing politically now, and over the next few years. This is the change, which I said decades ago would start in the mid 2020s. Again, it’s here now, though there’s a lot of slogging to go. It’s not a sure win, of course. Neoliberals or fascists may win (more likely fascists), but really the two main options are left wing populism or right (fake) wing populism. The generational pivot is here, and the “we can’t take it any more, you’ve destroyed the middle and working class” is here.

Oh, and one more pretty chart: the effect of our AI overlords on electricity bills:

What can’t go on, doesn’t. There’s not enough middle class wealth left to steal. The US either un-develops or there is a radical change in politics. Either way, politics is going to get a lot more turbulent. There’s a reason why most Trump’s cabinet lives (hides) on military bases now. They know how much they’re hated.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – November 09, 2025

By

On November 9, 2025

Comments

by Tony Wikrent

Trump not violating any law

‘He who saves his Country does not violate any Law’

Trump Stuns By Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ When Asked Directly NBC’s Kristen Welker ‘Don’t You Need to Uphold the Constitution?’

Joe DePaolo, May 4th, 2025 [mediaite.com]

Bannon Tells GOP: ‘Seize the Institutions’ of Government Now or We’re ‘Going to Prison’ After 2028

Jon Queally, Nov 07, 2025 [CommonDreams]

It’s Dick Cheney’s World, We’re Just Living In It

[Talking Points Memo 11-08-2025]

Neither side would ever admit it, but MAGA’s ongoing authoritarian takeover is the heir of one man: Dick Cheney, the former Vice President who died this week.

Trump and his movement tried to distinguish themselves by loudly abandoning the Iraq War as a legacy of the Bush administration. During one debate in 2016, Trump pointed out to Jeb Bush that 9/11 wasn’t exactly an example of his brother having kept the country safe. Before the 2024 election, Cheney called Trump the biggest individual “threat to our republic” that the country has ever seen.

Now, now. It’s a shame they couldn’t get along, after all, they had so much in common.

Starting in the late 1980s, Cheney developed and implemented the dictator-like theory of executive power in which we all now live. The roots here lie in the long-held bitterness among many on the right over President Nixon’s resignation in the aftermath of Watergate, but, as NYT reporter Charlie Savage noted, Cheney expressed the idea fully as the Iran-Contra scandal wound to a close. That was a critique of what Cheney described as a “more assertive Congress that no longer honors the traditions” of executive power, but really a vision of a president who, when invoking national security concerns, could do whatever he or she wanted with backing by the full federal government.

At one point, in 2002, Cheney told Cokie Roberts that there had been an “erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job,” citing both the War Powers Act and the Anti-Impoundment Act…..

The Trump Doctrine: If We Don’t Like Ya We’ll Kill Ya 

Mark Wauck [via Naked Capitalism11-02-2025],

‘At What Point Does This Cross a Line Into International Criminality?’ 

[Politico, via Naked Capitalism 11-02-2025]

 

Media Pontificating About Trump’s Motives for Attacking Venezuela Keep Ignoring that he Openly Admitted It Was to Take Their Oil 

[The Column, via Naked Capitalism 11-06-2025]

Trump throws himself a Great Gatsby party while people can’t even afford ketchup

Dean Obeidallah, Nov 02, 2025

Are You on Trump’s List of Domestic Terrorists? There’s No Way to Know. 

Nick Turse [via Naked Capitalism 11-06-2025]

Read More

The Evolution of Richard Bruce Cheney’s Foreign Policy Ideology

By

On November 8, 2025

Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

Former Vice President Richard Bruce Cheney, the human manifestation of the US Deep State, died four days ago.

Good riddance.

The man was a war criminal. He is also the man singularly responsible for America’s accelerating international decline. His policies effected the death of thousands of American soldiers and Marines, and the death of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of innocents. Just a few days ago Col. Larry Wilkerson, Gen. Colin Powell’s outspoken chief of staff, in a video all should watch, unequivocally called him a war criminal.

If there is a hell, he’s there.

If there is such a thing as reincarnation he’ll soon return as a cockroach. But I’m not here to discuss his afterlife.

It’s the evolution of his ideology that I want to consider.

Cheney was President Ford’s Chief of Staff from 1975-77. While Chief of Staff he engineered Donald Rumsfeld’s appointment as the youngest SecDef ever. He did so on the basis that Rumsfeld would act as a successful counterweight to Kissinger, whose power and whose influence over President Ford was almost total in the foreign policy realm. All his life Rumsfeld cultivated a persona of intelligence and wisdom, but ultimately he was an incompetent boob, losing himself in detail and missing the big picture, always. Sure, his comment about known-unknowns was actually insightful, it was deriviative of a better thinker than he.

Rumsfeld’s two tenures as SecDef were both failures. But back in the 70s he and Cheney stood no chance against Kissinger. They lost virtually all their foreign policy battles with the maestro. While National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State Kissinger dominated American foreign policy-making like no other Secretary of State since John Quincy Adams and like no other since. Kissinger was a briliant man, cunning bureaucratic infighter and skilled leaker. He was also an extremely self-serving memoirist.

But, like Kissinger or not, when in office he co-created a diplomatic framework with Nixon and Chou Enlai that lasts in many respects to this day. They built something few men ever accomplish and it deserves respect and an urgent reappraisal. Kissinger promoted detente, linkage, triangular diplomacy and most importantly prudence in the conduct of US foreign policy. Yes, I realize the irony of using prudence to describe Kissingerian foreign policy, but it’s true. Taking the long view it’s hard to deny, especially when comparing his diplomacy with every SecState that came after him. Try to deny it. You can’t.

The world order Kissinger and Nixon created between 1969-74, endured for decades. But, as Nixon said, “in politics, nothing lasts.” Their order lasted until it was wrecked by a resentful Dick Cheney and his neocon acolytes during the presidency of Bush II. While Kissinger and Nixon engineered a time of great global stability, whatever you think of their politics or their actions while in office, they laid the foundations for the end of the Cold War, not to mention an era of relative peace between Israel and its enemies that endured until the assassination of Yitzakh Rabin in 1994. Cheney and Rumsfeld on the other hand inaugurated the era of the Empire of Chaos. When and where American power has been used since Dick Cheney’s rise, the result has been chaos. Name me a single American intervention since Cheney’s ascension as Vice President and after that has resulted in success. You can’t do it. Every single one is a master-class in the creation of chaos. We don’t nation-build; we manufacture failed states.

Ford’s loss to Carter in 1976 imbued Cheney and Rumsfeld with a lifetime resentment of Kissingerian diplomacy. Cheney and Rumsfeld took different paths, but had the same ultimate policy goal for America: ‘Machtpolitik’. The use of maximal American power to preserve the pax Americana for as long as possible. Rumsfeld went into the private sector and got rich. Cheney got himself elected to the House of Representatives, where as a ten-year backbencher he never saw a defense program he didn’t vote for.

Then Cheney got appointed SecDef by Bush I. The Gulf War happened. He’s incensed US forces didn’t go to Baghdad and topple Saddam, so was his protege Wolfowitz. When Clinton beat Poppie Bush, Wolfowitz left DoD for thinktank land and Cheney, like Rumsfeld before him, took a lucrative business sinecure. While out of power, Cheney and his acolytes spread their neoconservative ideology like a virus. They built the think tank Project for a New American Century with the central goal of promoting its ‘clean break’ policy prescriptions. PNAC ideas soon became the sole driver of America’s post-Cold War foreign policy, especially when President Clinton adopted them, damn near wholesale.

This is a crucial point. Clinton adopted regime change in Iraq as a policy goal. He beefed up the no-fly zones over Iraq, as well. Indeed, Clinton’s foreign policy was totally incompetent. Seriously, we still have troops in the Balkans. And don’t forget the illegal partition of Kosovo from Serbia, which opened up the nasty can of worms affecting us even now. The main point here is WE DID IT FIRST. The USA. Not China. Not Russia. The indispensable nation created the precedent. At the time the partition was vehemently opposed by the Russians. Russia was so incensed, and mostly impotent at the time, that they sent troops to occupy Pristina’s airport. US forces were ordered to overpower them. US Gen. Mike Jackson, to my eternal gratitude, defied the order saying, “I’m not having my soldiers responsible for starting World War III.”

I recount this episode of Bubba’s presidency because it represents what international relations scholars and historians call a ‘revolutionary diplomatic moment.’ Spoiler: this is a big fucking deal. The partition of Kosovo was the exact moment when the US went from being a status quo power, defending the pre-existing order, adhering to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations (a principle established in 1648, by the way), to a revolutionary power, engaging in regime change and the conduct of illegal aggressive war: neoconservatism in action. Action that results in a straight line from Kosovo to the war in the Ukraine. Bubba ain’t blameless by any stretch of the imagination. But Cheney represents ‘Boss Level’ culpability.

Cheney’s final acts were many and deleterious, directly causing the decline he sought to avoid by abusing American power. First, he got himself appointed to Bush II’s veep selection committee. He then chose himself. The rest of the story is a tragic recital of ignored intelligence, spilled blood, criminal invasions, vast American fortunes pissed away in the sands of Iraq and Afghanistan and the senseless death of millions of innocents. All this because he got his feefees hurt by Henry Kissinger.

He may be dead but his influence persists like a zombie and I have no idea when it will finally be killed.

Open Thread

By

On November 8, 2025

Comments

Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts.

Did Burry, Altman, Friar, Huang, Karp and Sacks Just Pop the AI Bubble?

By

On November 7, 2025

Comments

The stock market bubble inflated by AI hype since late 2022 might finally be popping. If this week’s reversals turn into a sustained downtown, analysts might look back at the actions of tech executives and Trump adminstration figures this week as the straw that finally broke the camel’s back.

The warnings have been coming for a while.

Ed Zitron (on the business side) and Gary Marcus (on the technical side) have been warning about the AI bubble for years now.

Even rubes such as myself noticed when 7 AI-fueled stocks exceeded 50% of NASDAQ’s market cap.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has been warning of an AI stock market bubble since August.

Dumbass META boss Mark Zuckerberg started saying bubble a month or so later.

JPMorgan’s Michael Cembalest noted that AI-related stocks have accounted for 75 percent of S&P 500 returns and 80 percent of earnings growth since ChatGPT launched in November 2022.

Harvard economics prof Jason Furman pointed out in late September that U.S. GDP growth in the first half of 2025 would have been 0.01% without AI capex investment.

Yet Another Bad News Cycle for AI

Meanwhile the litany of bad headlines for AI continued.

This is just a sampler and just from this week:

The Big Short Comes For AI

On Monday, November 3, legendary short seller Michael Burry shorted Nvidia, the chipmaker at the heart of the AI/LLM mania, and Palantir, the AI-powered government contractor.

As of Friday, he’s up about $1B.

Going for That Government Money

That’s when the AI hucksters blinked.

Well, Sam Altman had already blinked, flipping out at podcaster Brad Gerstner and walking out after a testy exchange:

Brad Gerstner: “How can a company with $13 billion in revenues make $1.4 trillion of spend commitments? You’ve heard the criticism, Sam.”

Sam Altman: If you want to sell your shares, I’ll find you a buyer. Enough.

I think there’s a lot of people who talk with a lot of breathless concern about our compute stuff or whatever that would be thrilled to buy shares. We could sell your shares or anybody else’s to some of the people who are making the most noise on Twitter about this very quickly.

We do plan for revenue to grow steeply. Revenue is growing steeply. We are taking a forward bet that it’s going to continue to grow and that not only will ChatGPT keep growing, but we will be able to become one of the important AI clouds, that our consumer device business will be a significant and important thing, that AI that can automate science will create huge value.

We carefully plan. We understand where the technology, where the capability is going to grow and how the products we can build around that and the revenue we can generate. We might screw it up. This is the bet that we’re making and we’re taking a risk along with that. A certain risk is if we don’t have the compute, we will not be able to generate the revenue or make the models at this kind of scale.

Palantir CEO Alex Karp went on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday and was asked about Burry’s bet:

“The two companies he’s shorting are the ones making all the money, which is super weird. The idea that chips and ontology is what you want to short is batshit crazy. He’s actually putting a short on AI. … It was us and Nvidia. I do think this behavior is egregious and I’m going to be dancing around when it’s proven wrong. It’s not even clear he’s shorting us. It’s probably just, ‘How do I get my position out and not look like a fool?’”

Wednesday OpenAI CEO Sam Altman went on the Conversations with Tyler podcast and openly called for a government backstop:

“ When something gets sufficiently huge … the federal government is kind of the insurer of last resort, as we’ve seen in various financial crises … given the magnitude of what I expect AI’s economic impact to look like, I do think the government ends up as the insurer of last resort.”

That same day, OpenAI’s CFO Sarah Friar echoed the same message at a Wall Street Journal technology conference.

The Journal led its story with “OpenAI Chief Financial Officer Sarah Friar said that …the company hopes the federal government might backstop the financing of future data-center deals.”

As OpenAI ramps up its spending on data center capacity to unheard of levels, the company is hoping the federal government will support its efforts by helping to guarantee the financing for chips behind its deals, Friar said. The depreciation rates of AI chips remain uncertain, making it more expensive for companies to raise the debt needed to buy them.

“This is where we’re looking for an ecosystem of banks, private equity, maybe even governmental, the ways governments can come to bear,” she said. Any such guarantee “can really drop the cost of the financing but also increase the loan-to-value, so the amount of debt you can take on top of an equity portion.”

Friar said OpenAI could reach profitability on “very healthy” gross margins in its enterprise and consumer businesses quickly if it weren’t seeking to invest so aggressively.

“I’m not overly focused on a break-even moment today,” she said. “I know if I had to get to break-even, I have a healthy enough margin structure that I could do that by pulling back on investment.”

OpenAI is losing money at a faster pace than almost any other startup in Silicon Valley history thanks to the upside-down economics of building and selling generative AI. The company expects to spend roughly $600 billion on computing power from Oracle, Microsoft, and Amazon in the next few years, meaning that it will have to grow sales exponentially in order to make the payments. Friar said that the ChatGPT maker is on pace to generate $13 billion in revenue this year.

Friar realized immediately she’d screwed up and went to LinkedIn to course correct:

Unfortunately for Friar, she couldn’t take it back nor did she address the other dumb things she said at the WSJ confab, per Bloomberg:

“I don’t think there’s enough exuberance about AI, when I think about the actual practical implications and what it can do for individuals. We should keep running at it.”

Regarding charts like this that argue that many of the AI industry’s recently announced deals are just a circular money-go-round, Friar said:

“We’re all just building out full infrastructure today that allows more compute to come into the world. I don’t view it as circular at all. A huge body of work in the last year has been to diversify that supply chain.”

Thursday, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang flagrantly linked the fortunes of Amercian AI companies to American national security, telling the Financial Times that “China is going to win the AI race.”

The Nvidia chief said that the west, including the US and UK, was being held back by “cynicism”. “We need more optimism,” Huang said on Wednesday on the sidelines of the Financial Times’ Future of AI Summit.

Huang singled out new rules on AI by US states that could result in “50 new regulations”. He contrasted that approach with Chinese energy subsidies that made it more affordable for local tech companies to run Chinese alternatives to Nvidia’s AI chips. “Power is free,” he said.

Gary Marcus was on it fast, pointing out that he’d been warning that the AI bros would go for government funding since January:

Former Blackrock ace Edward Dowd quickly called out the scam as well.

Dowd also warned that:

A cluster of 3 Hindenburg Omens and Altman & Jenson signaling the end is near on the AI bubble by asking for taxpayer assistance does not bode well for the short term on $SPX.

Should Trump green light government assistance and we get a pump it will likely be faded as it will not be nearly enough. Congress has true purse strings.

The stink of desperation is in the air to keep the headline indices afloat with 7 AI stocks. Ends badly at some point.

Sam Altman went into backtracking mode too.

I’d quote the whole thing but it’s mostly bullshit and Altman is a known liar (just check out this 62 page deposition from OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever which references Altman’s “consistent pattern of lying”).

Altman’s claims were complicated when this October 27 letter from OpenAI’ Chief Global Affairs Officer to Michael Kratsios, Executive Director of the U.S. government’s Office of Science and Technology Policy emerged. The letter says (via Simp for Satoshi):

The Administration has already taken critical steps to strengthen American manufacturing by extending the Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit (AMIC) for semiconductor fabrication. OSTP should now double down on this approach and work with Congress to further extend eligibility to the semiconductor manufacturing supply chain; grid components like transformers and specialized steel for their production; AI server production; and AI data centers. Broadening coverage of the AMIC will lower the effective cost of capital, de-risk early investment, and unlock private capital to help alleviate bottlenecks and accelerate the AI build in the US.

Counter the PRC by de-risking US manufacturing expansion. To provide manufacturers with the certainty and capital they need to scale production quickly, the federal government should also deploy grants, cost-sharing agreements, loans, or loan guarantees to expand industrial base capacity and resilience.

Altman spoke to Reuters to “clarify”:

OpenAI has spoken with the U.S. government about the possibility of federal loan guarantees to spur construction of chip factories in the U.S., but has not sought U.S. government guarantees for building its data centers, CEO Sam Altman said on Thursday.

Altman said the discussions were part of broader government efforts to strengthen the domestic chip supply chain, adding that OpenAI and other companies had responded to that call but had not formally applied for any financing. He said the company believes taxpayers should not backstop private-sector data center projects or bail out firms that make poor business decisions.
…
Tech officials argue that these investments are tantamount to a national security asset for the U.S. government [Reuters supplies no source for this argument. Nat], given AI’s growing role in the U.S. economy. OpenAI has committed to spend $1.4 trillion building computational resources over the next eight years, Altman said Thursday.

Regardless of Altman’s backpedaling, the whole thing became moot after the Trump administration shut down talk of AI bailouts.

Trump Tech Czar Slams That Door Shut

David Sacks, the White House’s AI czar (and founding member of the PayPal mafia alongside Elon Musk and Peter Thiel) was quick to shut this talk down, tweeting Thursday morning:

I have to wonder if Sacks’ statement — which was a political must following GOP losses in Tuesday’s elections — might not be a Lehman Brothers moment for AI and the larger stock market bubble.

Ed Zitron’s latest report won’t stop the bleeding:

Based on analysis of years of revenues, losses and funding, from 2023 through 1H2025, OpenAI took in $28.6bn in cash and lost $13.7bn.

It was just reported that OpenAI ended 1H 2025 with $9.6bn in cash.

OpenAI has burned $4.1bn more than we thought.

And as long as we’re risking 2008 flashbacks, never forget that in 2023 the infamous Larry Summers joined the OpenAI board. I’m shocked Larry hasn’t already saved the day.

Sarcasm aside, this may be the beginning of the end for the Interregnum of Unreality that I posited began in 2008.

Pokrovsk Has Fallen, Now What?

By

On November 7, 2025

Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

With the encirclement of the Pokrovsk-Myrnohrad pocket by Russia now complete, it is only days, a week or two at most, until mopping up operations are complete. This is an indisputable Russian victory, but don’t expect the war to change much. Russia’s strategy of attrition is about incremental gains that create unsustainable enemy losses, not the acquisition of territory. A fact that Western, especially retired American generals consistently get wrong. They expect the Russians to fight like Americans. That’s a terrible assumption to make.

On June 30 of this year I wrote that Russia was beginning its advance on Pokrovsk in earnest.  Now, a lot of Western commentators, like Gen. Keane, have made the claim in the legacy media, along with other retired US generals, that the Russian’s have been bogged down in and around the Pokrovsk area for a year and only have 30-something kilometers to show for their efforts. This is why I cite the above link about the start of Russia’s encirclement of Pokrovsk. American generals obsesses about big red arrows on maps, rapid armor advances taking territory, breakthroughs while Russia’s attrition of Ukrainian soldiers massively degrades the Ukraine’s ability to prosecute the war. US generals, however, display staggering amounts of hypocrisy in discussions about Russia’s massive and successful strategic bombing campaign. Those selfsame generals who cheered American Shock and Awe war porn that dominated the news coming out of places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Funny how they now label the same strategy, employed now by evil Russia, as war crimes and focus on Russia’s killing of civilians, which the Russians are studiously trying to avoid and largely succeeding. But I digress.

American generals, think tankers and media personalities are ignorant, be it vincible ignorance or supererogatory, of what a strategy of attrition really is and what it looks like. Here’s the best definition I’ve got for you: using military power to gradually degrade an opponents military resources, i.e. killing as many of your adversary’s soldiers and wrecking as much of his kit as possible and/or breaking his will to fight. Nowhere in the generally accepted definition of attritional warfare does it say a word about occupying as much land as possible. That comes later. Much later.

With Pokrovsk surrounded what should we expect from the Russians? The landscape west of Pokrovsk is mostly open fields for many, many kilometers, with few tree lines, villages or ravines for Russian forces to utilize for an effective defense against the Ukraine’s drones; hardly an ideal landscape for attritional warfare. In fact, with the Ukraine’s ability to manufacture drones still intact it would be a killing field, littered with Russian armor, APCs, infantrymen and anything else the Russians might send into the open.

Make no mistake, the Russians are going to have to march across the landscape west of Pokrovsk at some point, but I posit the following near-term moves by the Russians. I’ll follow up with some developments I expect later in 2026.

First, Russia will continue encircling other salients, or cauldrons as the Russians prefer to call them, they appear to be enveloping, like the Kupyansk-Senkove salient or the potential envelopment of Konstantinivka. These areas offer excellent defensive positions and landscapes for Russia’s small-teams based attritional style of attack along the line of contact. It begins with artillery and/or missile bombardment, small teams then attack and destroy Ukrainian positions, kill or capture soldiers, retreat, then let the Ukrainians return. Rinse and repeat with drone coverage dominating overhead and you’ve got a style of war that chews up time like Andre the Giant hoovered up food at all you can eat buffets. It’s efficacy is not in doubt so long as you understand Russian strategy. If you’re ignorant of it, well, then you are expecting a big armored break-out after Pokrovsk, which won’t happen, because that’s not how Russia is conducting this war.

Second, Russia will consolidate its gains in and around Pokrovsk, after the Ukrainian soldiers in the pocket are killed or surrender. For some time after I foresee Russia utilization of tactical defense within an offensive framework, much like what American generals called the strategic defensive during our Civil War. In essence, at first they’ll capture positions, then dare the Ukrainians to take them back by appearing weak, digging in, rotating out tired soldiers, and firming up logistics. Subsequent Ukrainian attacks lead to mounting casualties. Then do it again.

In the context of capturing Pokrovsk, Russia will continue targeting the Ukraine’s industrial base, especially drone manufacturing sites. And it will hammer the nearby cities of Kramatorsk and Slovyansk with drones, missiles and FAB glide bombs, but it will be some time until Russian ground forces are within reach of mounting an attack on either city. Much will also depend on how well the Ukraine’s armed forces perform.

In war your opponent gets a vote on whether you succeed or not. Will the Ukraine’s armed forces hold up or might we see a general collapse in 2026? The Ukraine is now engaged in the widespread press ganging of men to fight on the front, reports this story at Responsible Statecraft. Some of the men press-ganged into service have reportedly died from blunt-force trauma, after beatings with iron bars and one young man died from injuries sustained attempting to jump out of the vehicle he’d been forced into. Most of the ‘busificaiton’ as it is euphemistically called has taken place in 2025 and thousands of such videos can be found here, proof that the Ukraine’s manpower shortages are growing to crisis levels. Such activities by Ukrainian recruiters also bodes ill for the armed forces, and adjacently indicative of the efficacy of Russia’s strategy of attritional warfare. Although press-ganging is not something Russia directly influences, it’s a clear symptom of the unsustainably large amounts of casualties the Ukraine has and continues to sustain.

In the near-term expect the war on the ground to continue as it has since 2023. Russia will grind it out, slowly and patiently. I always find it laughable when commentators claim that hardliners in the Kremlin are chomping at the bit for Putin to launch a massive offensive. This is stupid, Western group-think. Why is it so hard to understand that Russians are naturally endowed with a deep well of patience to draw upon? Especially Putin. That is not to say there will be no fireworks in the near future. But they will be arriving from a different direction than Russian soldiers will. They will come from above.

A near-term imperative for Russian forces is a way to achieve drone dominance along the line of contact. Russia has, by and large, achieved a hybrid-kind of air superiority. This has largely been achieved by its manufacturing prowess, producing, according to some sources, nearly a thousand Geran-2 drones a month. One report dated this September describes a new jet-powered version, the Geran-3, that is operational, largely resistant to electronic warfare and can be fitted with a 90 kilo thermobaric warhead, making them extremely lethal, inexpensive and plentiful. Russia also manufactures and utilizes on a daily basis hundreds of Gerbera decoy drones. By using the Geran-2 and 3s in conjunction with Gerbera decoys and higher value missiles like the Iskander and the hypersonic Kinzhal the Ukraine’s ability to mount anything approaching an effective air defense is nullified.

Achieving drone superiority over the line of contact is another matter altogether. The Ukraine can still manufacture enough FPV drones to give the Russians pause, forcing their continued use of small-teams to attack, destroy and then retreat. But, the Russian’s are innovating. For example, there are recent reports of the deployment of a mother-ship drone with two FPV drones attached with fiber optic cables. The mother ship drone flies at altitudes above the FPV’s alleged EW bubble and by connecting its two FPV drones via fiber optic cables achieves complete EW avoidance. While not a game changer, widespread deployment of such drones would make the war that much more difficult for the Ukraine to prosecute effectively.

Pokrovsk is a major victory for Russia, a significant morale booster for the troops and those on the home front and proves the efficacy of Russia’s strategy of attrition. But don’t expect much to change after Pokrovsk. It’s a loss for the Ukraine. The question, how big of a loss? How many troops died or will be captured once the pocket is completely mopped up remains the most important variable of the battle; how badly will it effect the Ukrainian armed forces morale is what bears watching, by Putin and Zelensky alike.

 

Mamdani Represents A New Era Of Political Conflict

By

On November 5, 2025

Comments

As everyone’s probably aware, Mamdani, a brown muslim social-democrat who has promised, among other things, to open city grocery stories, make transit free, a rent freeze on stabilized units (about 40% of New York’s apartments), universal free child care and to build 200K new apartments. He’ll pay for it with tax hikes on rich New Yorkers and corporations.

(Read Mamdani’s Victory Speech. Powerful stuff.)

Mamdani’s extraordinarily charismatic, with an upbeat optimistic style and rarely shies from fights (though he has backed down on Palestine.) He’s a good candidate.

But he won because he was laser focused on the affordability crisis: food, housing, transit and child care. For many years now I have said that voters in most Western countries want real change, and they will vote for anyone who seems to not be like a status quo politician and for any promise to overturn the status quo. Like a wolf in a leg trap, they’re so desperate to escape from a future of eternally lowering expectations, one in which they can’t afford a home, can’t afford kids, can’t afford holidays, and are even told not to buy expensive coffees.

Trump doesn’t come across as an establishment politician, so many people voted for him. Corbyn’s wave was based on this. Brexit was based on “ever since we’ve been in the EU things have gotten worse for ordinary people in Britain.” Yes, the EU wasn’t the reason (though it is a pile of garbage, it’s a less rancid pile than British pols who wanted out of it), but that didn’t matter. “Get ground into the dirt slower, peons” doesn’t sell any more.

So people will vote for Britain’s Reform, or Canada’s Conservatives, or LaPen, or Germany’s AfD. Nasty piece of shit fascists, all of them. But they act differently from establishment politicians, and people will vote for that, even if their likely policy are vile and stupid and cruel.

It isn’t just Mamdani who won yesterday, ever major race outside Texas when Democrat, and all the Democrats ran on affordability issues.

Now one of the tropes is that young men have gone right wing in most countries. There’s some truth to it, but less than it appears:

NBCNews exit polling on young men (18-29) in VA, NJ and NYC VA: Spanberger +14 NJ: Sherrill: +10 NYC: Mamdani +40

If young men were solidly right wing, this wouldn’t have happened. What they want is change. They’ll take right wing change if that’s all that’s on offer, but just as Bernie was projected to beat Trump in a direct competition, they’ll take left wing change preferentially, because left wingers offer hope (free stuff) that right wingers just refuse to match. The right wing offer is “we’ll kneecap your peer competitors: women and immigrants, so you do better.” The left wing offer is “we’ll help everyone and we’ll actually give you shit and actually stop prices from increasing.”

The left wing offer is better just on straight up self-interest. And a lot of people hate the rich far more than they hate immigrants, so the “and we’ll soak the rich” left-wing offer goes over well. It’s also more realistic because it is the rich who actually destroyed America’s prosperity, and to the extent immigrants contributed, it’s because the rich used them force wages lower: the classic strategy of “pit one half of the working class against the other half.”

Alright, so that’s why Mamdani won. But what now?

New York city is a “creature of the state”. Kathy Hochui, the governor, and the NY State legislature have veto power over essentially everything Mamdani wants to do. Hochui endorsed Mamdani, BUT while she agrees with his policies, there’s one big exception: she doesn’t want to increase taxes on the rich and corporations, and she effectively has a veto.

So what’s likely to happen is that she kneecaps Mamdani by making it so he can’t get the money to do all that he wants to. (Saying you agree with Mamdani while making sure he can’t deliver isn’t actually agreement. It’s an attempt to pander to the left while still getting rich by actually protecting the oligarchy.)

Trump has said that he will cut funding to New York and we can expect the standard ICE and border patrol invasion.

Mamdani’s going to face to tidal wave of elite opposition to what he wants to do. If he’s to be successful, and the first exemplar of a new wave of left wing politicians in America (America’s only chance of a decent future) he has to figure out a way to still deliver on enough promises (rent freezes, for example) so that New Yorker’s feel better off AND he needs to frame his losses as because of enemy action which can be defeated in the future by electing his allies as New York state governor, to the state legislature, and to federal offices. He needs to become the linchpin of a larger movement. He cannot be seen as a failure, he must appear as a fighter who has some victories and part of a movement which can win overall.

All of this is possible. People hate, hate, hate the elites in America. Attacking landlords, health insurance executives and politicians who cover for them and want them to get even richer is popular. Taking action against them in whatever ways are possible is adored. Mamdani is lucky in this: his enemies are loathsome parasites who aren’t satisfied being the richest rich the world has ever seen, they want MORE and they want to take it from everyone else.

Mamdani knows a fight is unavoidable, so he’s squaring up and framing the fight as a mass fight against a corrupt bully. (From his victory speech.)

So Donald Trump, since I know you’re watching, I have four words for you. Turn the volume up! We will hold bad landlords to account because the Donald Trumps of our city have grown far too comfortable taking advantage of their tenants. We will put an end to the culture of corruption that has allowed billionaires like Trump to evade taxation and exploit tax breaks. We will stand alongside unions and expand labor protections because we know, just as Donald Trump does, that when working people have ironclad rights, the bosses who seek to extort them become very small indeed.

New York will remain a city of immigrants, a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants, and as of tonight, led by an immigrant. So hear me, President Trump, when I say this. To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.

What Mamdani represents is America’s last hope. If the movement he exemplifies loses, America’s future is to slowly un-develop, becoming more akin to Brazil or India than to developed nations. Vast numbers of homeless, desperate workers, extended new slums and people absolutely desperate for food, healthcare and housing. In this he is similar to Corbyn: the last chance for America to turn it around before the shit hits the fan. If this movement fails, America fails. It may be able to get back up again, sure, but it will be far harder to do in twenty years than in three or seven years.

While it is in everyone’s interest, including over 90% of Americans for the American Empire to end, having America become a failed state, its likely prospect if current trends continue, will be horrific.

Avoiding that is, to a remarkable degree, on one Muslim social democrat’s shoulders.

The annual fundraiser ends this week. We’re less than $500 out from making our goal. If you value the site and can afford it, please give or subscribe. I’m incredibly grateful to all who have given and to all subscribers.

Page 1 of 485

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén