Author: Sean Paul Kelley Page 1 of 7

'89-'93 BA History, Houston
'95-'07 Morgan Stanley, Associate Vice President
'99-'02 MS International Relations and Economic Development, Saint Mary's University
'07-'13 International Software Sales Manager, Singapore
'13-'16 MA, History, Thesis on Ancient Silk Road City of Merv, UTSA
Kelley lives in San Antonio, Texas.

After reading this article at @RStatecraft by @connor_echols I am more convinced than ever that admitting the Baltic States into NATO was the biggest mistake NATO ever made: three miniscule states with three tiny militaries dominate policy yet contribute nothing but acrimony and accusations towards Russia.

Just read the stridency of their claims towards Russia. Former Latvian PM: “Putin acts the way he acts, and the only options for the West are either to submit or to resist.” Or the present Estonia FM: “Russia’s war against Ukraine is driven by one thing and one thing only: its refusal to accept the Soviet Union’s collapse and its unrelenting imperialist ambitions.”

It’s our annual fundraiser. We’ve raised a little over $7,620 from 65 people in the last twelve days, out of our goal of $12,500. If you’re a regular reader and can afford to support our writing, please subscribe or donate. Over 10,000 people read every day, but without those who give the site would not survive.

Look, I get the Baltics are paranoid about chimerical Russian irredentism towards the three republics. NATO can’t and shouldn’t allow alliance policy to be dictated by its three smallest members, who are tiny, paranoid and are lead by some critically undereducated fools, like Kaja Kallas, who said, “Chinese are very good at technology but they are not that good in social sciences . . . . The Russians… are not good at technology at all, but super good in social sciences.”

I’ll let that one go without comment. The bottom line is tiny states are dictating the policy of huge institutions and nations, just take a look at how the Israeli tail wags the American dog.

We’re supposed to make peace with enemies, folks, not friends.

Dialogue is essential more than ever. Not paranoia.

It’s Our Annual Fundraiser. If you read us a lot, please Subscribe or Donate.

Russo-Ukraine War Update

I’m going to relay a conversation I had on X today with everyone here. It’s just easier this way, as I dislocated my shoulder yesterday and sprained my wrist falling down the stairs. Let me add, that crap that movie star tough guys do when they have a dislocated should is utter balderdash. Having my shoulder relocated was excruciating. So a ton of typing is out. Copy and paste is in. But I digress.

I replied to a Tweet, an X, WTF do we call those things now? Well, I’m sticking with Tweet. This one from the US Ambassador to NATO.

The US Ambassador to NATO tweeted the following;

“Russia is losing hundreds of soldiers a day without making any significant gains in Ukraine. Russia must recognize that it’s time for peace and come to the negotiating table.”

I replied to the Ambassador with a series of tweets:

“The @USAmbNATO clearly does not comprehend what a strategy of attrition means. Capturing territory and manuever warfare are secondary to degrading the Ukraine’s ability to fight. This Russia is succeeding at quite well.

I would add that US Generals, who excel in tactics and the operational art of war–which includes logistics–love to quote Bradley’s axiom “amateurs talk strategy and professionals talk logistics.”

I loathe this quote for a number of reasons. Most of all because US generals and their partisans use this argument from authority to dismiss often very valid criticism. I’ll give you one example: Tommy “Catastrophic Success” Franks. He, Stanley McCrystal and Petraeus are prime examples of US generals with a signal lack of imagination, relying on the strength of their logisctical prowess, e.g. The Surge in Iraq.

This was my third tweet to the Ambassador:

[The generals] insistence on this adage has lead to consequential misunderstandings of strategy and why so many continue to conflate Russia’s lack of forward movement with failure (i.e. General Kellog, ~spk). A strategy of attrition is all about the gradual erosion of the enemy’s ability to fight.”

It’s hard for me to comprehend that these men cannot understand Russia’s strategy in the Ukraine. Then an X user asked me a rather intelligent and sincere question:

For how long would you say Russia has been succeeding quite well at degrading Ukraine’s abiity to fight? For the full 3.5 years or a shorter time span? Follow up: how long will this success take to yield major changes on the battlefield?

Let me first say how pleasant it was to get a sincere question on X. Usually it’s agreement or derision, and second I thank my cultured interlocotur for a few hours of intellectual stimulation.

My reply was fivefold, and many of you have read portions of it here in the past:

All modern Russian wars–starting with the Great Northern War in 1700–begin badly for Russia. All of them. The SMO is a perfect example. The Russians were uprepared, had an ill-thought out strategy and got pushed back badly. They got whooped. But the Russian’s learn quickly.

So, they did what they normally do in such situations, traded space for time. By mid-2023 their industry was on a total war setting, minting more artillery shells than all of the US and NATO combined. They’d called up fuck-tons of troops . . .

. . . and because necessity is the mother of all innovation quickly outstripped the Ukraine in drone warfare. Plus, with their thermobaric weapons and Iskander missiles in high production they devestated fortified positions. Then they attacked supply routes. (They also innovated an EW unjammable fiber-optic drone that was devastasting ~spk added later.) Then 3-5 man teams . . .

. . . cleared the trenches. The Kursk invasion was a catastrophe for the Ukraine and by 2024 it was clear the Ukrainian army was in trouble, [seeing as] recruiting meant kidnapping, and the Ukraine began shifting divisions will nilly against attacks initiated by the Russians.

Russia [now owns] the initiative & numbers & air superiority over all the Ukraine & drone superiority over the front lines. It looks very bad for the Ukraine now. Russia grinds away, caring not about territory yet. That comes next year in 2026 when they take Odessa. Does this [clarify]?

It’s Ian’s annual fundraiser. This allows us to cover the changeover of hegemony from America to China, environmental collapse, internal US fascism, what a better society would look like, Gaza, AI, the coming stock market crash and various other issues. You can Subscribe or Donate here or contact Ian at ian-at-fdl-at-gmail-dot-com if you need another way to donate (mail, usually. A lot of cash apps don’t work in Canada.)

Intelligent and incisive he asked the following:

If they don’t take Odessa in 2026 would you adjust your analysis? Also, Russia hasn’t won all its modern wars. Crimean, Russo-Japanese & Afghanistan come to mind. Chechnya is a bit messy in terms of winners/losers. So while Russia can take heavy casualties sometimes it’s too many.

My reply was threefold:

First, I didn’t say Russia has won all its modern wars. I said they all begin badly. Second, if they don’t take Odessa, I would be surprised. But it would not mean ultimate failure. Russian sabotage teams are already in Odessa. Chechnya actually became a total success.

It took more than a decade, much like the Murid War, but Chechens are now some of the most fanatically loyal soldiers in the Russian Federation. Crimea was a shit-show as was Russ-Jap and WWI and Afghan. Russian’s aren’t perfect, but they will win the war against the Ukraine.

The present military leadership knows exactly what they are doing. One action might change their strategy: an attemped decapitation strike that actually hit the Kremlin. Oreshniks would rain down on Kiev, brutal and devastating and foreign operaties (US/UK) would be targeted.

He then asks,

When you say they will win the war against Ukraine, what does victory entail? Full territorial acquisition? I predict more stalemate – for multiple years to come if both sides stick to the military approach at resolving the conflict. I’ve been right on that for ~4 yrs thus far.

My final reply was this:

Victory will be dictated on the battlefield. The Russians are not interested in full territorial acquisition. They are interested in landlocking the rump state. Zelensky will be killed or exiled. A pro-Russian regime will be installed. The Ukraine will be neutral . . .

. . . along the lines of the Austrian Treaty at the end of WWII. It will not be a frozen conflict. Putin’s main goal is to create a peace that endures for at least a generation after he dies or steps down. That’s what I see are Russia’s goals. I doubt the war continues past 2026.

My main beef here remains the lack, be it from wilful ignorance or delusion, of US policymakers, generals and think tank denizens, of understanding Russian strategy in the Ukraine. Understanding attrition is not difficult. Just google it and read the wikipedia entry. How difficult is that? Do they not teach boolean operators at the US Army War College?

It’s Our Annual Fundraiser. If you read us a lot, please Subscribe or Donate.

Israeli Actions Encourage the Formation of the Coalition That Will Ultimately Defeat It

A little lesson in history is in order to understand why Israel remains dominant in the Middle East and continues to wage war against just about everyone. To understand better Israel’s strategic dilemma we have to look back at the Crusades.

The First Crusade established the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099. But, before the Kingdom of Jerusalem could be established invasion routes from the north had to be secured, which occurred in 1098 when the Crusaders conquered Antioch, modern Antakya in Turkey. Second, its flank had to be secured, which is what Baldwin of Boulogne did in 1098 by capturing Edessa, modern day Şanliurfa in southeastern Turkey. Baldwin then created the County of Edessa.

Between 1099 and 1144 the Kingdom of Jerusalem fought against the Fatimids of Egypt, defeating them several times. The kingdom then attacked Damascus several times; winning some fights and losing others. The Crusaders attacked and captured Tyre, Tripoli, Acre and Beirut. They only held Beirut for a time.

The Byzantines were also active in keeping the Arab and Seljuk princedoms in the region divided. They won more battles than they lost. The Byzantine strategic goal was the reconquest of Anatolia. They had some success under Alexis Comnenos, but when he died so did his genius. That said, for most of fifty years Crusader Jerusalem was safe. It would take two to three thousand words to narrate this all comprehensively so I’ve oversimplified. Please be sympathetic.

One might get the impression that with the Byzatines knocking the Seljuks about in Anatolia, keeping them on their back heels and the Crusader States growing steadily and beating Fatimid Egypt several times that victory seemed assured. But even before the first Crusaders captured Jerusalem time was not on their side.

In 1094 the governor of Seljuk Aleppo, Aq Sunqur al-Hajib, was beheaded on accusations of treason by the Seljuk emir of Damascus, Tutush I. Aq Sunqur al-Hajib’s son, Imad al-din Zengi escaped to Mosul and was raised by its governor. As he matured he grew into a fierce warrior, becoming a scourge upon the Crusader states; one they were unable to answer. As the years passed Zengi fought, relentlessly. After many losses but more victories Zengi, in 1144, captured the Country of Edessa, dealing a crippling blow to the Crusader States. This blow necessitated the Second Crusade. For the next quarter century the Kingdom of Jerusalem muddled through, fending off most challenges. But the loss of Edessa caused a persistent drain on the kingdom’s power.

In the year 1171 Saladin came to power in Egypt, a development that would rapidly end the Kingdom of Jerusalem’s decades long containment of Fatimid power. Saladin’s life goal was the destruction of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. With Egypt under his complete control, Saladin immediately inaugurated the first part of his great project: unifying the divided states surrounding the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

Saladin was largely successful in unifying the region, notwithstanding his loss to King Baldwin IV in 1177. The Leper King, Baldwin IV, husbanded a large force and defeated Saladin at the Battle of Montgisard on November 25, 1177. Saladin had the good fortune of defenses in depth and quickly rebuilt his nearly eradicated forces quickly as he ruled both Syria and Egypt.

Catastrophe struck the Kingdom of Jerusalem when King Baldwin IV died in August of 1186. This set off a series of political machinations in Jerusalem wherein ultimate power was gained by a coterie of bigoted incompetents. In 1187 they marched their army towards the Sea of Galilee to challenge Saladin. At the Horns of Hattin, where there was no water, the heavily armored Crusaders quickly grew parched and exhausted. Saladin defeated them easily. The way to Jerusalem was now open. Saladin was ultimately successful in its conquest and by late 1188 the entire Kingdom of Jerusalem was under Saladin’s control.

The point of this brief history is this: the only way the Israelis can be defeated is exactly how the Crusaders were defeated. A coaliton of Arab and Islamic states must unify in common action against Israel.

On the other hand, all Israel must do to exist is maintain a divided region. This has been Israel’s grand strategy since its inception and remains so today, even though Netanyahu is making a mess of it by attacking everyone, everywhere, committing genocide in Gaza while expecting unconditional US support of its every action. A tall order at a time when the US public has begun seriously questioning continued support of Israel, especially in the face of the genocide in Gaza.

So, can the states of the region find common cause? Well, Turkey’s president Erdoğan is sitting on the fence, but could make life very difficult for Israel by simply shutting of its energy supplies, which come from the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline. Never mind the size and technological sophistication of its armed forces, that dwarf anything Israel has.

Turkey’s indecision notwithstanding, signs of potential unified effort by several Islamic states are beginning. First, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed a mutual defense pact that includes a Pakistani nuclear umbrella. Second, “Egypt’s Sisi has called Israel the “enemy’ and is renewing ties with its neighbors,” says Ted Snider at Responsible Statecraft. In a September speech at the Emergency Arab-Islamic Summit in Qatar Sisi gave an unprecedented speech. His three main points were that Israel is the enemy. He then warned the Israelis that there would be no new diplomatic progress in regards to the Abraham Accords, adding that Israeli actions could possibly violate the 1979 Egypt-Israeli Peace Treaty. But the really shocking statement came, as Ted Snider recounts, when Sisi said, “it has become imperative for us to establish an Arab-Islamic mechanism for coordination and cooperation to enable us all to confront the major security, political, and economic challenges surrounding us.” Adding to this, “[that] the geography of any Arab country extends from the Ocean to the Gulf and its umbrella is wide enough for all Islamic and peace-loving countries.”

A second round of war with Iran might trigger a more formal defensive alliance structure like that between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. One that would be more comprehensively Islamic, as Iranians are not Arabs, but Persians. The Turks might buy into it as well. I’ll explore what a potential coaliton might look like in a subsequent post. But for now, the ultimate consquences of such an event are not heartening.

The wild card happens when Israel stares down total defeat. At this point Israel’s nuclear ambiguity will be clarified, necessity being the mother of all forced decisions. If Israel faces certain destruction what will it do? Lash out and let the nukes fly? Or accept defeat in the hopes of preserving something? In our complex adaptive global society nothing is inevitable. However, the day is coming when Israel will face a hostile, well armed and coordinated Arab-Islamic coaliton. The results are unforseeable, but more than likely devastating.

It’s Our Annual Fundraiser. If you read us a lot, please Subscribe or Donate.

The GENIUS Act is Anything But

This post is meant to piggy-back on Ian’s recent post, “The Next Big Crash Is On Its Way.” There has been little coverage in the legacy media of the GENIUS Act. This recent legislation, passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by President Trump is about “regulating” the crypto-economy. The GENIUS Act is an acronym for “Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins.” Why Congress is so addicted to these stupid acronyms is beyond me. I prefer the old Roman way, naming a law after the legislator who initiated it, such as the Nunn-Lugar Act of 1991, or the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002. The acronym of this act is also antithetical to what it is. It’s a fools act of financial deregulation, which in my opinion will accelerate and exacerbate the coming financial crisis.

But first, the legislative highlights:

Stablecoins to be pegged 1:1 to the dollar. Tokens must be backed with cash or short-term treasuries. Issuers cannot offer interest. There is a loophole, however, and I will discuss it later.
Establishing rules for stablecoin issuers to segregate of reserves, undergo monthly audits and establish minimum liquid capital requirements.
Developing anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist processes.
Designating which parties are permitted to issue stablecoins.
Giving the Department of Treasury, Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and FDIC greater regulatory power.
Classifying stablecoin owners when a custodian or issuer files for bankruptcy.

The main idea behind the act is to make stablecoins a reliable crypto-currency to invest in. So what are some of the potential negative consequences of the act? The Kansas Fed notes, “Funds flowing into stablecoins have to flow out of another source. If stablecoins are purchased out of checking accounts, for example, then these purchases represent a shift of funds from banks (as deposits) to issuers (as stablecoins) . . . . This potential flow of funds from bank deposits into stablecoins could increase Treasury demand but also could reduce the supply of loans in the economy.”

In fact, the Treasury warns that $6.6 trillion of assets could be lost by the banks into stablecoins. Stablecoins have the potential to decrease the money supply, create a chilling effect on banks issuing loans, which would drive up interest rates. Moreover, issuers of stablecoins will be able to examine every single purchase you make. As far as I can tell there is no privacy provision in the act, nothing preventing issuers from selling stablecoins owners data.

Who is going to regulate Stablecoins? The SEC has no investigative or enforcement budget. The IRS has been effectively neutered. The FDIC will have no role in stablecoins so long as they are not FDIC insured. With no real oversight issuers can simply put any kind of triple-A rated assets to back them—even when the ratings of the triple-A rated assets are fraudulently obtained–like the CDOs that caused the 2008 financial crisis. That’s what Bear Stearns tried to get away with in late July 2007, when two hedge funds filed for bankruptcy. It was always my understanding that these were money market funds. Perhaps the real story has gone down the memory hole. Nonetheless, who is to say stablecoins, without real oversight and constant audits—seriously, as I just said, the regulatory agencies have no enforcement budgets—won’t be backed by treasuries? This is also a serious workaround of the Fed. It will without any doubt reduce its ability to manage interest rates and fight inflation, which is its legal remit, at present.

The largest issuer of stablecoins is Tether, having issued $155 billion so far. Tether is registered in El Salvador, has 150 employees and claims to hold the “majority” of its reserves in cash and short-term treasuries. The company has done its best to avoid audits and remains opaque. Morgan Stanley writes that in “2021, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) fined Tether for misleading disclosures on its reserves.” My question to Ether management (and regulators) is what constitutes a majority? 50.1%? 75%? 95%? And what assets are in the minority? Are there derivatives that leverage Tether’s holdings? What kind of leverage? 10:1? More? This question goes right to my next concern.

Just who can issue stablecoins? Anyone. Amazon is exploring issuing them. So is Walmart. So are the big banks. Maybe even Palantir? My great fear is that it will allow a complete takeover of our financial system by Big Tech companies. Even the states can issue stablecoins. What’s worse, no amendments were passed to make sure that crypto companies absorb losses, instead of a Federal bailout. When this metastasizes it will make 2008 and 1929 look like picnics.

More questions than answers, it seems: “Do we want our payments system managed by Walmart?” asks Barry Eichengreen. I’d also ask if we want Silicon Valley to gain power over our financial system? Do you want Palantir, X, Meta or Google to issue legal tender? As Barry Eichengreen warns, “do we want X to know every detail about our every transaction, which they would if we used their stablecoin, or would we prefer the Fed to be the entity that issues the digital money that we use?” Me? I’m flat out opposed to digital money. I want to continue to use cash for one simple reason: anonymity, which is the same thing as saying, privacy.

And about that loophole: while stablecoin issuers cannot offer interest on the tokens, they can issue rewards. Some companies are already giving away annual awards that equal 5.5%. What this means is that the companies issuing rewards are juicing their own returns somehow, and there is no way that the coins are 1:1 100% backed by cash and short-term treasuries. One month treasuries are paying 4.26%. How do you make money paying 5.5% when you’re only getting 4.26%. You see the problem? They absolutely must have other higher interest paying investments in their portfolio. Otherwise they’d go broke. It’s just not possible to sustain. That leads to fraud and fraud is a direct line to corruption. Like this corruption on an epic scale: The Trump family’s investment in World Liberty Financial has increased their wealth by $5 billion.

Hillary Allen summarizes the risks:

By opening the floodgates for “stablecoins,” Congress has made the US financial system more vulnerable to crises, increased the chances of government bailouts for tech platforms, and further entrenched Silicon Valley’s political power. In fact, such outcomes seem to be exactly what some techno-boosters want.

I hope to write more on this as I more fully comprehend the risks. But what I can say knowing what I now know, this is far from genius: more like mass stupidity and it will not end well.

It’s Our Annual Fundraiser. If you read us a lot, please Subscribe or Donate.

“How Can You Not Be Romantic About Baseball?”

By Sean Paul Kelley

On September 24, 2025

Comments

Fans of the Dodgers and fans of the Yankees–that would be me–know we are witnessing two of the greatest young men to ever play the game of baseball. But do the rest of you realize this? How rare and special this moment is? As we gouge out each others eyeballs over politics, let’s take a simple moment to celebrate two outstanding young men. Sound okay to you?

First I start with Aaron Judge, now entering the prime of his career, in a non-steroid era has already broken many outstanding records. In 2017 he became the first rookie to hit 50+ home runs in a season. He is the fastest player in MLB history to hit 300 home runs. And the fastest to hit and 350 home runs. He also broke Roger Maris’s single-season home run record of 62, without steroids. Personally, I believe that Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa should all have an asterisk by their names and the footnote about it should be in all caps.

Judge is only one of four players, those players include Babe Ruth, Mark Maguire and Sammy Sosa, with four seasons of 50+ home runs. His rookie year, as I already wrote, he hit 50+. In 2022 he slammed in 62 home runs. He rocketed 58 home runs in 2024. And so far in 2025 he’s slugged in 51, counting tonight.

I’m a Yankees fan, but I also love baseball. I played the game from T-ball at 6 years-old well into high school. I never thought I’d see Godzilla in America but damn if he is not out on the West Coast right now. You do know I am talking about Dodger’s pitcher and hitter Shohei Ohtani, right? Simple fact: he’s probably the most amazing player we’ll ever see play the game. He’s just that fantastic. He electrifies crowd’s the way Michael Jordan did back in the day–and I saw MJ play several times.

Not since Babe Ruth has a hitter been such a dominant pitcher. That’s more than 100 years. Otani is simply unreal. This season alone he’s hurled 58 strikeouts and slugged in more than 50 home runs. No one has ever done that.

Last season, he hit more than 50 home, runs and stole more than 50 bases. That’s never been done. He’s created two new two clubs, one of which no baseball player will ever enter again. That was last season when he stole 50 bases and hit 50+ home runs. Judge, at 6’7″, 282 lbs., is an amazing hitter but simply doesn’t have the speed to steal bases like Otani, at 6’3″ 210 lbs., does.

Ohtani has something else Judge does not: a wicked pitching arm. He’s had 100 career starts on the mound in MLB and slugs like the Babe. He threw five no hit innings a few nights ago and yesterday threw 6 scoreless innings with 8 strikeouts. Unreal.

The only reason I post this is because I think that any baseball fan who’s reading this ought to take a silent moment of gratitude for the fact that we are witnessing two players unlike any we have ever seen in the game before. And also recognize that Shohei Ohtani is singular and unique, and we will never ever see his like play the game of baseball again.

To paraphrase, it’s just damn hard not to be romantic about baseball.

P.S. I’d be remiss, nay, negligent, if I failed to add The Big Dumper’s 60 home run season this year. We are truly witnessing baseball’s Golden Age. Only one non-Yankee in the American League has hit 60 homers in one season: Cal Raleigh, aka The Big Dumper.

If you’ve read this far, and you’ve read some of my articles and most if not all of Ian’s, then you might wish to Subscribe or donate. Ian has written over 3,500 posts, and the site, and Ian, need the money to keep the shop running. So please, consider it.

First Time Ever: Himalayas Breached By Monsoons

By Sean Paul Kelley

On September 22, 2025

Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

The Kunlunshan is the Chinese equivalent of the Front Range of the Rockies in Colorado, except they are much higher.

From time immemorial, even before humanity began writing, the Himalayas were never recorded as breached by a monsoon. During my trip across Central Asia in 2003 I traveled from Golmud, China to Lhasa, the provincial capital of Tibet–the moment we entered the Kunlunshan we were never lower than 10,000 feet (3,048 meters). On the second leg of my trip from Lhasa to Nepal along the Friendship Highway I was never lower than 12,000 feet (3,657), often as high as 14,000 feet (4,267 meters). I passed through three passes of 5,000 meters (16,402 feet), higher than every mountain in the lower 48 states and less than 3,000 feet lower than the highest in Canada. In other words, Tibet is one serious rain shadow.

As I said, within the time humanity has kept records, both written and oral, this has never happened: a minimum of 4,925 years and a maximum of 50,000. Those 50,000 years include exactly zero notices of the monsoon breaching the Himalayas. This is a profound silence. Especially when considering the many verbal and written notices of a great flood across multiple pre-literate cultures. The monsoon actions that occurred in the last several weeks are a unique, unprecedented occurrence, although knowing what I know of rivers debouching out of the Central Asian mountain ranges, I will concede that the Great Flood myth could be based on a Monsoon breach. That said, Tibetan verbal and written traditions are eerily silent.

What exactly happened, then? The short answer comes from Climovo:

“This year scientists say the monsoon winds breached the Himalayan climate barrier and pushed moisture into Tibet. Experts at the Wadia Institute report (ETV Bharat) and analysis in Zee News show satellite images and weather maps that point to an unusual northward flow of monsoon moisture in 2025.”

So how did this happen? What climate changes caused it? I quote Climovo again:

“Two weather systems came together: the summer monsoon and a strong band of western disturbances. When they met over the mountains, the air was pushed and twisted in ways that let moisture ride over or through lower passes. Satellite analysis cited by the Wadia Institute and discussed in news coverage shows the plume of moisture reaching north of the ridge—something scientists call a breach of the Himalayan shield.”

What are Western disturbances? As Wikipedia notes:

“Western disturbances originate in the Mediterranean region in the Mediterranean Sea. A high-pressure area over Ukraine and neighbourhood consolidates, causing the intrusion of cold air from polar regions towards an area of relatively warmer air with high moisture. This generates favorable conditions for cyclogenesis in the upper atmosphere, which promotes the formation of an eastward-moving extratropical depression. Traveling at speeds up to 12 m/s (43 km/h; 27 mph), the disturbance moves towards the Indian subcontinent until the Himalayas inhibits its development, upon which the depression rapidly weakens. The western disturbances are embedded in the mid-latitude subtropical westerly jet stream.”

How many disturbances are we talking about? ZeeNews reports there were up to “[n]ineteen disturbances . . . five each in June, July and August and three more in early September.”

What’s even more odd is that “[t]hese weather systems are usually winter phenomena. (Emphasis added, spk.) They bring rain and snow to north India and the Himalayas in colder months. This year, they collided with the monsoon’s moist currents, pushing them further north [earlier].”

5220 meters of dusty road in Tibet on the way to Nepal.

I’d also note that there was a substantial drought in the Pontic Steppe of the Ukraine and Russia this year, leading to a lesser wheat crop. Drought is often caused by prolonged high pressure systems, at least here in Texas.

What are the results of this unique monsoon?

The torrential rainfall, says Reuters, is responsible for “killing 880 in Pakistan over the season while in India, nearly 150 people have lost their lives in August alone.

Moreso, in “India Punjab, 37 people have died since the start of August and the rain has destroyed crops across tens of thousands of hectares.” The destruction of crops, obviously has a knock-on effect of famine. Even worse, in Pakistan’s Punjab “1.8 million people have been evacuated in recent weeks after floodwaters submerged nearly 3,900 villages.”

There is much more damage to come, as it is August and the high Himalayan rivers are running at above capacity. Many rivers in Pakistan and India–Punjap, after all, means the ‘Land of Five Waters–expect flooding and more chaos as a result. More agriculture ruined. More famine. More suicides in the Indian countryside. It’s simply devastating.

I’d also add that, because of the northward pressure on the monsoon, South India, like Tamil Nadu, the entire Deccan, and the Western Ghats got 48% less rain than usual from the monsoon season. More catastrophes soon to happen there.

Please check the links and this video (seriously, you need to watch this video–why? Because the comments are mostly coming from India and reporting in on the reality of the situaiton) if you want to more fully understand the rare, almost unique occurrence that happened this year. It’s just another data point, right? Not really, it’s a serious anomaly that ought to rouse an immediate sense of urgency to act. Dangerous climate anomalies accelerate, continuing to pile up, higher and higher–no pun intended.

How many more until we act? My answer: serious hardcore sustained intense climate actions in the United States. Only then.

Hope it isn’t too late.

Bad Faith and Criminality

By Sean Paul Kelley

On September 19, 2025

Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

In the aftermath of the 1905 Russo-Japanese War, US president Teddy Roosevelt brought together negotiators from Russia and Japan to hammer out a peace. This was the first time the US was ever seen as an ‘honest broker’ in international relations. In 1919 President Wilson sailed to Paris with his 14 Points doing his level best to get the Europeans to negotiate an honorable peace. The wily Europeans outfoxed the rigid and moralizing Southerner in just about all the negotiations. Nevertheless, the US retained the aura of ‘honest broker’ until this century. I can’t say exactly when we lost it—probably when Colin Powell lied to the UN in testimony before the Second Iraqi War—but lost it we did. Somewhere in there we lost the aura of exceptional power we possessed by pissing away a metric shit-ton (yes, an American who can do metric!) of blood and treasure in the sands of Iraq and mountains of Afghanistan—and with that loss, we shot whatever credibility we retained right in the foot. But those, shall I say, are different discussions for a different day.

Lost auras being the one thing—at least we still got a chakra, right? (Ugly and poisoned though it may be.) It’s the second thing that grates the teeth at night: an everlasting chronicle of bullshit deeply eroding any sense of diplomatic norms that’s transfigured us into OG rogue nation. So, grab some popcorn, rewind the Wayback Machine and head back to 2014 cause I got a whopper to tell you.

It’s late summer of 2014 and a brushfire war is simmering between Russia and the Ukraine. The US and its European allies are eager to see the Ukraine join NATO. They bring Russia and the Ukraine together and pretty much force feed them the Minsk Accords. Then, over the course of the next eight years the NATO allies string the Russians along encouraging the Ukraine in its ever persistent demands to renegotiate the Minsk Accords.

Nota bene: yes, I write it as the Ukraine. I know the Ukrainians desire their benighted lot to be call Ukraine.

Do I care?

Not one iota.

It was always called the Ukraine—I mean, the Russians use the partitive genitive (don’t ask) when describing the Ukraine as a nation—and it will ever thus be called the Ukraine.

Now, it took the Russians—rarely gullible—a long time to figure out our stunning acts of “bad faith.” But “bad faith” it was. The US and its European allies had no intention of ever compelling the Ukraine to live up to its international agreements with Russia. They were only ever playing for time, waiting for the day they could present Ukrainian membership in NATO as a fait accompli, hoping for a démarche, a dénouement. Damned if we got war in its place.

But the forever-war nation ain’t gonna let a little war-war stop it, no, no, no! Once America sets a precedent it’s game on, bitches! So, in late May-early June 2025 the US negotiated directly with Iranian diplomats signaling that no military action was imminent. While negotiations were held, the US and Israel agreed on America logistical support for an Israeli attack on Iran. A week after Israel launched its first strikes against Iranian nuclear sites, the United States followed suit. Not only is this acting in “bad faith” it’s outright deceit, a line no nation should ever cross in the conduct of negotiations. It’s one thing to bring two sets of instructions to negotiations, one always needs a fall-back position. But deceit? WTF?

Twice then, the US has acted in “bad faith.” It’s at number three when the wise recognize a pattern, three also being proof of outright illegality in the conduct of international affairs, at least according to international and domestic law. So, there is that, you know?

Domestic law, you ask? How so?

“Young grasshopper,” says Master Po, “sit and I will tell you.” (Anyone who gets the reference wins a cookie.)

Treaties signed by the United States and ratified by the Senate are, in accordance with the 1920 Supreme Court ruling Missouri v Holland, the supreme law of the land.

Skeptical-like, you query, “what treaty did we violate, Sean Paul?”

Easy, the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. This treaty enshrined, in international and domestic law, a norm of diplomacy dating back 575 years to the city-state of Milan and its then ruler Francesco Sforza—a norm, or custom only violated three or four times in the last century it’s so sacred. So basic, so important is the principle of the personal sanctity of the negotiator, aka the diplomat, that it is respected by every nation on the goddamned planet.

It is the singular, fundamental law of diplomacy from which spring all the other elements of reciprocity evident in the conduct of international relations. And in typical American fashion, just days ago, we nuked that norm into oblivion when we in concert with Qatar and Israel arranged for an attack on credentialed Hamas negotiators.

I don’t have anything else to add except a few questions. Why would any nation enter into negotiations with us ever again? Who would be that stupid and reckless? And what, if anything, can ever be done to regain international trust? What I’ve detailed are fundamentally outrageous betrayals of diplomatic norms, norms developed over 500 years ago and used for centuries.

It’s not rocket sceince. Hell, it ain’t even algebra. Christ, it’s more basic than fractions. It should be easy to comprehend. And the behavior is so fucking counter-productive I would expect even the stupid to fathom.

I would be wrong.

P.S. And consequences,those things be bad, like ju-ju bee tree bad shit. Didnae take long, aye?

P.P.S. Oh, and by the way, this leads directly to the massive diversification away from petrodollar settlements, which gets us a fuckton closer to the end of the dollar as global reserve currency. That’s going to be one serious painful adjustment for Americans to make, domestic production notwithstanding.

Unconditional Surrender Grant

By Sean Paul Kelley

On September 17, 2025

Comments

I always wondered where the term ‘unconditional surrender’ came from during World War II. After reading a biography of U.S. Grant as an undergraduate in the early 90s I learned. When attacking Fts. Henry and Donelson on the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers, respectively, when the commaders of the Confederate forts requested terms Grant replied, “No terms except an unconditional and immediate surrender,” which earned him the sobriquet ‘Unconditional Surrender’ Grant–at least until the aftermath of the bloodbath at Shiloh.

Why do I bring this up? I just completed the Ron Chernow biography of Grant. As a work of popular history it’s good; however, Geoffrey Perret’s biography is much more rigorous and drips with historical sensibility. Still, credit to Chernow for a related reason: his biogrpahy led to a docu-drama miniseries about Grant. I cannot recommend this series enough. It’s also had the knock on effect of launching a much needed reappraisal of the man, the general and the president. Also, know this: I’m a born Southerner, native Texan. The Confederates were traitors. Grant and Sherman gave them what they deserved.

The “Lost Cause” revisionist history movement at the turn of the 20th century reframed the Civil War from a war to end slavery into a war about states rights. Moreover it did grievous damage to Grant’s reputation as a general and president and elevated Lee to divine heights. Both balderdash, mind you. But, the damage was done. Grant was the better general. He was a genius who conceived of operations and strategy two orders of magnitude greater than Lee. And, well, you know, there would be no 14th and 15th Amendments without a Grant presidency. So, read Chernow’s book or watch the series.

Both will learn you some good knowledge.

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

Author: Sean Paul Kelley Page 1 of 7

The Tiny Dictate to the Large

Russo-Ukraine War Update

Israeli Actions Encourage the Formation of the Coalition That Will Ultimately Defeat It

The GENIUS Act is Anything But

“How Can You Not Be Romantic About Baseball?”

First Time Ever: Himalayas Breached By Monsoons

Bad Faith and Criminality

Unconditional Surrender Grant