Tag Archives: nuclear power plant

The new presiding solution

The mess we inherited is not one we asked for, whilst the dumbo’s of the World (all sitting in Washington DC) give us through the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd0p4y9y48xo) ‘Trump warns ‘clock is ticking’ for Iran as peace progress stalls’ with the ‘threatening’ setting we are given through “They better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform. “TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!” We are also given that Iran is attacking Saudi Arabia and the UAE again and the Middle East Monitor (at https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260517-saudi-arabia-is-pulling-europe-toward-a-gulf-helsinki-deal-with-iran-because-washington-failed/) ‘Saudi Arabia is pulling Europe toward a “Gulf Helsinki” deal with Iran — because Washington failed’ where we see the words of Tamer Ajrami giving us “I said clearly that Gulf states “have nothing but to talk to Iran now”. That was not idealism or goodwill. It was hard security math: the old formula is eroding. Bases do not protect the way people assumed, and guarantees shrink the moment they face a real test. Today, this is no longer an argument. It is a reality driven by markets before politics.” In an article that gives us “According to Western reporting, Saudi Arabia is floating something close to a “Gulf Helsinki Act” arrangement with Iran—modeled on the Helsinki process of the mid-1970s during the Cold War. It would not be just a Saudi–Iran deal. It would extend to the Gulf and the European Union, aiming to lock in non-aggression, structured economic normalization, and monitoring and implementation mechanisms.” So, as I personally see it, whilst President Trump is acting like the pussy he likes to grab. He made that statement in September 2005 on some tour. So whilst America is kept holding the bag, the entire economic and political setting comes in the hands of Europe and it is based on a proposed regional non-aggression and security framework initiated by Saudi Arabia, drawing inspiration from the 1975 Cold War-era Helsinki Accords. So this example is half a century old and still what would some call the stuff of legends and others will refer to it as an example that the United States could have used to further their own needs. But instead they pissed off the Persian bully and facing an American bully they both did what they do best (read: shout incriminations and attack the people around them). I am happy that I gave my solution to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the UAE (to destroy their infrastructure without resorting to heavy bombings, but the effect would have been equally devastating. A presented a recap in ‘In Summary’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/03/23/in-summary/) giving the total view (to some extent) where Iran’s infrastructure goes ‘Bye bye’.

But in all this Tamer Ajrami gives us “A Gulf–EU–Iran non-aggression arrangement without the United States creates a dangerous gap: the Gulf and Europe commit to non-aggression, Iran commits too, but Washington and Israel still retain the ability to strike Iran. What does the agreement do then? Does it become a nice document that collapses at the first air raid?” There is a simple (or simpler) setting. You see, Iran merely needs to leave the Gulf States alone, if it still attacks Europe would be faced to escalate actions against Iran and perhaps that would also shut down any Russian escalations we se towards Europe, because if it sees the damaging outcome of even one European strike Russia hopes to be wearing brown pants, instead of red pants hiding blood and wounds. But I still like the approach that the UAE had, but Iran made sure that they are not willing to talk peace now that the Barakah nuclear power plant has faced the attack of drones. I reckon that both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have had it with Iran, there might no longer be an option to talk. I had the idea on December 14, 2021 when I wrote ‘Keeping my promise, part 1.’ It was a way to meltdown an Iranian nuclear react from the inside (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/12/14/keeping-my-promise-part-1/). It came to me as there are two certainties. One it was based on a Russian design and they want it to be implemented ‘exactly’ (for obvious reasons) and the fact that all engineers are struck with laziness, even when innovation might be called for. As such I created this untested solution, I am, after all not a nuclear physicist. Now that Iran attacked a nuclear power plant, I see no restriction to hand Saudi Arabia and the UAE access to this innovative strike in me and when a rector melts down it will be unavailable for work for decades to come. The design came with some warnings as three issues can only be resolved by a nuclear physicist, but its a freebee, so live with it. The setting of all this is that the world tires of Iran and there are over 2 billion people to wish they were somewhere else (not in this world). The time for talks and keeping nice is over. The Barakah attack clearly sets this out. But still  gives us another setting and we see this with “Gulf states and Europe “bypass Washington” in practice. That would mean refusing the use of their airspace and territorial waters for any military or intelligence activity against Iran. And maybe refusing to enforce sanctions that destabilize the region and recreate the Hormuz shock. This is not a small move. It would be a strategic shift.” And as I see it, that strategic shift might be essential as this president is leaving his post (in the very near future) a nation that is about to become insolvent and it will not be able to afford even a Changli Freeman to replace the jeep required to move a general from points A to B. They will not be able to enforce anything, not without the money required for such an action. As I see it, they merely have the annexation of Iran to look forward to (well their bank managers see that as an option). 

So whilst we are given (in the BBC article) “Trump’s message echoed his threat that a “whole civilisation” would die unless Iran agreed to a deal to end the war, shortly before the ceasefire was announced in early April. The president warned earlier this week that truce was on “massive life support” after rejecting Tehran’s demands, labelling them “totally unacceptable”.” It is my view that this will never happen, two bullies agreeing on a thing? I severely doubt it. As such the Gulf–EU–Iran non-aggression arrangement might be the only way out for Iran and at that point the United States and Israel has to halt its actions as well. They would face the larger consequences of both the Commonwealth and Europe if they don’t and I reckon that we will see a light show in Washington DC to keep people looking away from an ex-president running for his life, because that is the setting that comes with insolvency. Their will be no red carpet exit and with his (allegedly) 37% approval rating which seemingly comes through a 100% disapproval rating by Democrats and at least a 50% disapproval rating of Republicans no other option will be left to him and at that point it will take over a decade to mend the bridges President Trump burned between January 20, 2025 and May 1st 2026, that is the impact of what needs fixing and it will take decades to get it fixed, anyone thinking that this will be a done deal in one or two high placed meetings is delusional. 

As I see it, it comes with a new stage, but this is top of mind thinking, there is no data or clear evidence in this. This has never happened before, but a new stage might be forming. It will be a stage where the new power table is set to Commonwealth, Europe and Gulf States. I reckon that the gulf states invited to that table are Saudi Arabia and the UAE. But as I see it, it will be a non-option to both China and Russia, we might not care what Russia thinks in this matter, but China is a different stage. It might not like that new power block to be in place. But that is a though I am merely having. 

To all a great day and my breakfast is now 1800 seconds and 1000 steps away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Foreign and Domestic

America is under attack. The question becomes whether this is a new one, or one that has been ongoing. There are several thoughts and they all, too some extent link together.

FOREIGN
The foreign groups ‘attacking’ America include both China and Russia. They are both using to some extent their own puppets. Let us call them Syria and Iran for now. Russia’s pulling the strings of Iran. No matter how the strings are pulled, no matter how acts are ‘begotten’, the issue is that Iran has been given the one carrot it cannot ignore. It is the support to get a nuclear power plant placed within Iran. Russia gets a string of benefits; this includes making America look bad, making their claims fall short, which according to the speakers in the Kremlin will look pretty good on the front page of Izvestiya (Известия). China is now giving support to Syria as Syria in a last moment of desperation plays the ‘oversight on my Chemical Romance stockpile’ card. The question becomes, whether it is just last minute, or certain cards were offered during the G20 to be played, because any of this, must seemingly be cast on making the US President to not look bad (the view projected after the fact will be an entirely different issue).

To support certain new options goes decently further than just the ad-hoc statement by United States Secretary of State John Kerry. These issues have been playing for some time and most issues started to accelerate as we all saw in the news. Many of the top tier papers reported these events. So how come that these events are still seen as a foreign attack?

That would be a fair question!

China and Russia had been blocking many of the events needed to make any stance against the indecent slaughter of the people of Syria (on both sides). I could cleverly state that Russia and China removed the ‘s’ and used laughter to block the US and other nations to get anything done there. The fact that the Bushehr plant is announced to get a new baby brother as reported by Polina Garaev “Putin will present Rohani with new deal worth $800 million for new batch of S-300, construction of new nuclear reactor at Bushehr” gives additional weight on the Iranian ‘support voice’ in regards to the Syrian question. Whether this will become the Alice Cooper nightmare remains to be seen, it is however clear that the S-300 additions do mean that they fear the response by Israel towards this new billion dollar baby. Trust me when I say that there will be well beyond $200 million in additional fees for consultancy, education and other requirements. The one part I do like about this all is that Iran seems to not trust their own propaganda on the ‘advanced’ Mershad from 2010 and prefers to rely on solid Russian technology as it was developed in 1978 (sometimes life throws you a nice juicy steak to blog about). Still, if Israel cannot get there via the air, I think I have found a way to super charge the fuel rods to melt them down all by themselves (pretty much stopping both reactors from ever working again). It should take only three elements and I got the idea from a snow globe, go figure!

All four players in this parade are anti-American; their union is not because they like one another, but because of their individual needs united in non-American likes. That does not make for an attack. That does not mean they are attacking America. That part had been shown in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800, which is only one of many newscasts on that topic. In addition there is http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/new-us-envoy-to-un-strongly-condemns-russia.html. This could be seen as a first level of evidence that the United Nation Security Council (UNSC) was nothing more than a political tool to stop any kind of condemnation and the lowest forms of support for the victims of the chemical attack.

Are there doubts?

Yes, even though some claims came that there was ‘evidence’, I am still having certain doubts in regards to the actual attacker. When a State secretary goes on a world tour visiting heads of state showing ‘secret’ evidence, parts are not right. It is shown to a group that is too large. Instead of giving it all to the media letting EVERYONE publish it would have been a much better policy, it could have had the result that the UK would have been in favour of actions. The delays, the Intel that WOULD have been there from those big boxes high in the sky, (commonly known as satellites), could have shown much of the evidence. Yet, personally, I am not completely convinced that they were attacks ordered by Assad (directly or indirectly), which I admit is a personal view and based on gut feeling more then anything else. Is it possible that some misguided Assad supporter did this? Yes, that is a definite possibility. I dealt with these thoughts in a previous blog called ‘tactical choices of inactivity‘. I have always believed that Al-Qaeda is only about Al-Qaeda and their goals. It was never about Syria for them (I personally believe this). The theatre of war in play gives them ample opportunity to get to USA and Israel. There is a chance that the number of military opposition leaders, who knew about chemical caches seems larger than most considered, which means that others knew too. This entire new play is as I see it is not about the fear from Syria AND Russia that unwanted elements might want to get things going out of hand. It is likely that this is already the case and a USA offensive would stop any chance of that part getting a certain level of control. It could be that this danger is in play, meaning that both Russia and Syria want to get out of the way fast, allowing the new diplomatic play to proceed, whist the US gets left holding the bag.

No matter how this plays out in any diplomatic way. We will see soon enough that Syrian victims will get overly victimised soon enough with added by-lines on how America never intervened.

DOMESTIC
In my view, I see that the domestic enemy of America seems to fit into three distinct categories. First of all, this is not about lone wolf terrorists, or any terrorist groups, they fall in the foreign enemy group. No, the Americans do not get to be that lucky as such.

The first enemy group are those libertarians hiding behind ‘freedom of information‘. This group is for the most the direct one we see, receiving all kinds of media support and protection. They do not need to fear the House of Lords and some Leveson report, but they do ‘fear’ what the NSA had been doing. The electronic Frontier foundation did instigate a case which they won. Sky News covered this at http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=905204. My issue is the quote “as part of the agency’s effort to track potential terror plots

In my mind, when (not if) the next attack on America succeeds, then the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) should MANDATORY in the light of ‘freedom of information’ reveal the names of all their supporters in this case to the family members of the victims the next attack has. There will be no carefully phrased denials; there will be no talk about ‘we so sorry’. I want to see those names clearly shown on-line. In addition, the EFF board members John Perry Barlow, Brian Behlendorf, John Buckman et al will have to visit all the funerals of those victims and look the survivors and family members of the deceased straight in the eyes. I wonder how ‘ideological’ they will feel at that time. Interesting that they (as far as I could tell) have not been too active in protecting people from places like Microsoft and others when we see articles like http://rt.com/usa/yahoo-microsoft-campaign-political-862/

That is another matter, which is ALL about personal gain (by those corporations) and not about keeping the American people safe. Another article is http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/13/gamers-fear-microsofts-xbox-one-could-be-future-of-prism-after-nsa-revelations, I do not agree with that article. That is not about some PRISM project, it is about Microsoft making sure that Microsoft gets more and others less. That is about greed and spawning INACTIVITY to the future new developers (unless it is in the hands of Microsoft). With gaming as a hundred billion dollar market, and as the gamers market surpassed the porn industry as a revenue group, did you expect these events not to happen?

I personally see the EFF as a sanctimonious group at best, of course others have their own view which are quite opposite of mine and as such they are very welcome to have that view, because I do believe in freedom of speech. I do have an issue with it when you endanger the safety of a nation.

The second group are the economic leprechauns (‘leper cons’ might be a better term). These are not the good and fiddledy diddledy types walking around with a cauldron of 100 gold coins. These are greed driven monsters in need of more and more at the expense of everything and everyone. They will enable their voice to whatever keeps them playing the game. The attack on Syria would have meant that their profits go down, so they would do whatever they could to stop it by forcing a diplomatic solution view. It seems such a humane view, yet, they will avoid taxation by moving funds offshore, they avoid taxation by becoming a virtual entity and they will prolong their game by removing your rights and your future. I personally believe that in many cases banks are on that side too. Did you forget on how in the lowest moments over 3.5% of mortgages are added to the foreclosure listings? Why are THEY a domestic enemy of America? Are sound business strategies suddenly outlawed? No, they are not, yet there have been too much personal and corporate gain preferences in the past and war is usually bad for business, unless you sell ammunition. In that regard my words might seem to be empty in the view of certain people, yet consider that America is an ideal by the people and for the people. How come that those views are so often drowned out by corporate greed, to give view to what is good for corporations and their stakeholders?

The third group is the most dangerous of all, it is a wild-card called ‘the self-centred person’. They are traitors, manipulators, journalists and/or politicians. The reader could even see me as one of these types of people. This group is dangerous as they could also be members of the first or second group. Yet, whilst wearing one of the other two cloaks they are only in it for the good of self. Edward Snowden falls in this group. Too much ‘evidence’ showed that he was all in it for himself. This was never about freedom of information or the security of America, it was about his life style, his future, his fortune and he was so willing to sell America down the drain in the process. The evidence? If that was truly about some level of honour, he would never have gone to Hong Kong or Russia. Several countries do not have an extradition treatment with USA, the fact that he ran to nations who are direct opposed to the American way of life should be seen in that light. Bradley Manning basically does not fit this group very well. There is a valid concern that he was misguided in his choices, when the choice was there he just gave it all away to Wiki-Leaks. In the smallest of defence of Manning, it seems that he at least was never out for personal gain; his ideology was, as I see it utterly misguided, which makes him the odd duck out. The recipients were however very willing to push his buttons for what they believed was a ‘righteous cause’, manipulative steps to say the least.

The problem with my own view (I will admit to that), is that my view has evolved from information given to me from journalistic and other sources, whilst I know that many in this ‘game’ have their own agenda to maintain. That means that it is about a target they have. The time of truly neutral journalism has been over for some time and I fear it will never return, which makes for an interesting view of the first amendment. The freedom of speech would become the freedom of representation of those we service, because the board of directors in a media group are often linked to other endeavours, making their freedom of speech a lesser item.

America is in my humble opinion under attack, and Syria is just the new stage where the American chess pieces are about to be moved, whilst some of them will be removed. I wonder where we all stand on the 1st of January 2014. That date will be soon upon us and that view might partially depend on the steps the growing New World Order coalition of Russia, China and India will take.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Science