WWIII Watch: Biden Secretly Authorized Ukraine To Strike Targets In Russia

By William Teach June 2, 2024 – 7:00 am

It’s not like Putin didn’t just say that doing so could widen the war or anything

The Washington Post tries to soft pedal this, forgetting that Washington, D.C., would be on the first strike list

The White House this week said it moved at “lightning speed” to allow Kyiv to use U.S. weaponry to strike limited targets inside Russia, just 17 days after Ukraine came begging for the capability. But for Ukrainians who have weathered a punishing Russian assault on the northeast Kharkiv region, those 17 days of waiting are emblematic of a White House that has lagged repeatedly behind battlefield developments at the cost of Ukrainian lives.

The new policy is aimed at shifting the strategic balance in a vital border region that is home to Ukraine’s second-largest city — an area that, if it fell, could crack the gate to a broader rout of Kyiv’s forces. Russia’s military has been attacking there for months, knowing that Ukraine’s strength is at a low point because of a seven-month lag in U.S. military assistance following congressional delay.

But until Thursday, President Biden had fiercely guarded a ban on Ukraine using U.S. military equipment to strike inside Russian territory. The fear was that the Kremlin would view those attacks as a dangerous provocation, tantamount to a direct U.S. attack on Russian soil.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky offered measured appreciation on Friday after Biden changed course on the weapons limits. For front-line soldiers, though, the gap between May 13, when Ukraine formally requested the change, and May 30, when U.S. officials gave the green light, was a bitter stretch of some of the most brutal attacks in the two-year-old war.

So, darned, 17 days where Ukraine couldn’t push the world to WWIII

Now Ukrainians can use U.S.-provided rockets and artillery to hit some Russian positions behind the front lines, potentially delivering relief to Kharkiv, where the front has mostly stabilized. Still, there are doubts in Kyiv, Washington and across European capitals about whether the change will be enough to transform battlefield conditions or turn back Russian forces. Biden is still refusing to let Ukraine use long-range U.S. weapons to strike airfields and other targets deeper inside Russian territory.

Granted, this is the way war should be. You attack our territory, we attack yours. But, now we’re playing with a madman, an actor playing president, and a feeble minded president, and two of the three have nuclear weapons.

(Fox News) A senior ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin says Russia is not bluffing about using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine and warned that the conflict could spill over into other countries.

Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chair of the Security Council of Russia, made the comments after President Biden quietly authorized Kyiv to launch U.S.-supplied weapons at military targets just over the border in Russia that are supporting an offensive against the northeastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv.

“This is, alas, neither intimidation nor bluffing,” Medvedev said Friday, speaking on the potential to use strategic nuclear weapons, per Reuters.

Happy Sunday!

Read: WWIII Watch: Biden Secretly Authorized Ukraine To Strike Targets In Russia »

Posted in Current Affairs, Joe Biden | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

PRC Asking Residents To Pay Lots More For ‘Climate Change’ Stuff

By William Teach June 1, 2024 – 3:44 pm

Certainly, the voters in the People’s Republik Of California will vote in favor of paying more taxes/fees to fund the stuff they believe in, right?

California voters will be asked for billions to fund climate, school facilities, lawmaker says

California lawmakers are poised to ask voters for billions of dollars in bond money to fund two priorities: school facilities and climate change initiatives, a legislator said.

Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, said Thursday that lawmakers next week will begin negotiating with Gov. Gavin Newsom to place the two bonds on the November ballot.

The governor, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, face a June 27 deadline to qualify measures for the general election. Rivas and McGuire did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

“It is my understanding that the Assembly and Senate leadership have determined that the school bond and the climate bonds are going to be the top legislative priorities as far as bond measures are concerned,” Muratsuchi said.

The measures, of which there are many including the climate scam one, have to pass the legislature before trying to get them on the ballot. I wonder why they don’t just pass the bonds as expenditures? Certainly, the majority of PRC voters elected the far leftists as their betters and leaders, knowing they were going to do this, right?

Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, and Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia, D-Coachella, both authored bills that would turn into bond measures asking voters for more than $15 billion to fund programs around water quality and conservation, flood management, wildfire prevention, clean energy projects and more.

Didn’t the PRC already do things that make horrendous wildfires more likely? Why not just reverse course, do a 180, and clean up the brush and put in fire breaks? You know that $15 billion will just reward campaign donors and make energy more expensive

Bonds are often regarded as attractive ways to win approval for popular projects without having an large, immediate impact on the state budget. The state is grappling with an estimated $45 billion deficit, which could make bonds more politically appealing.

It’s a good way to scam the residents into paying more in taxes and fees. Seriously, what happened to all the billions already allocated for the climate scam, schools, etc? Where’d it go? Maybe it’s time for an audit of state spending. Maybe stop pissing money away money on the stupid bullet train, which ballooned up to well over $100 billion? Isn’t lottery money supposed to go to the schools? How about asking the elected officials what they’re doing in their own lives to become carbon neutral.

Read: PRC Asking Residents To Pay Lots More For ‘Climate Change’ Stuff »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 1, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Ace Of Spades HQ, with a post on Vox whining about companies abandoning Woke.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Biden’s Abrams Tanks To Ukraine Are Failing

By William Teach June 1, 2024 – 10:30 am

This is what Brandon said when announcing the U.S. was sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine at a cost of about $310 million

(NBC News) Sending the tanks will “enhance Ukraine’s capacity to defend its territory and achieve its strategic objectives” because they are “the most capable tanks in the world,” Biden said.

“That’s what this is about — helping Ukraine defend and protect Ukrainian land. It is not an offensive threat to Russia, there is no offensive threat to Russia,” the president said.

Yes, they can be used for defense. They should be used for charging in and destroying Russian assets that are attacking Ukraine. Zelensky was demanding them. He lauded when they were allocated and arrived. How’s that working out?

US Abrams tanks failing in Ukraine as Russia mocks them as ‘empty tin cans’

Biden Brain SuckerAmerica’s Abrams tanks are failing on the battlefield in Ukraine as Russia has labelled them “empty tin cans”.

The US donated 31 Abrams to Ukraine last year in a move heralded as a potential game changer for Kyiv in its fight against Russia.

Ukraine had been complaining that its old soviet-era tanks were getting stuck in mud, not firing and constantly breaking down. But the superior US models appear to be faring little better in practice.

Speaking to CNN, Ukrainian crews working on the tanks say the Abram M1s are not as robust as touted. “Its armour is not sufficient for this moment,” said one crew member with the callsign Joker.

“It doesn’t protect the crew. For real, today this is the war of drones. So now, when the tank rolls out, they always try to hit them.”

So, we just pissed away at least $310 million for the tanks, plus training, shipping, and rounds. One problem is that the normal armor is removed

The tanks usually come equipped with “secret” uranium armour, but the US donated modified versions with Chobham armour, the composite ceramic and steel protective material developed in Britain in the 1960s. The move was likely made out of fears the uranium armour could end up in Russian hands.

But, they would still be in danger from above even with the uranium armour, due to the use of drones.

Even CNN has noticed that the tanks, which Biden was so excited to send over due to Zelensky’s demands, are mostly useless. As one of the people in the comments say

I am also an ex-tanker on the M1A1. The warfare in Ukraine really isn’t for the tank. Tanks are built more for open land spearheading with air support. When we did training in Hohenfels which is probably similar to Ukraine. When we went against OP4 seldom did tank units did well. When tanks are confined to trails or roads and not in open areas such as big fields and deserts, they are easy prey to be picked off by anti-tank units or in Ukraine by drones. The Abrahams is a good tank but like any tank vulnerable in these conditions. The same is for the Russian army as they don’t do combined arms maneuvering well and they are being picked off as well very easily including their top tanks such at the T-90.

So, wrong weapons systems for the fight.

Ex tanker here. This is what many of us in the U.S. Armor community said would be a likely issue for Ukraine. A tank by itself, while fearsome, relies on combined arms tactics for maximum effectiveness. That means coordination with air support, artillery, infantry, etc. Don’t blame the tank for having a counter that you were ill prepared for.

Which Ukraine doesn’t have. Ukraine is supposed to be getting F-16s in the coming months. Will those also be a waste of money?

Read: Biden’s Abrams Tanks To Ukraine Are Failing »

Posted in Joe Biden | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Vermont Law Charging Fossil Fuels Companies For ‘Climate Change’ Enacted

By William Teach June 1, 2024 – 7:00 am

So glad we elect Republicans to let this kind of thing go into effect, but, hey, maybe he wanted to teach some people about the Law Of Consequences

Vermont becomes 1st state to enact law requiring oil companies pay for damage from climate change

Vermont has become the first state to enact a law requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a share of the damage caused by climate change after the state suffered catastrophic summer flooding and damage from other extreme weather.

Republican Gov. Phil Scott allowed the bill to become law without his signature late Thursday, saying he is very concerned about the costs and outcome of the small state taking on “Big Oil” alone in what will likely be a grueling legal fight. But he acknowledged that he understands something has to be done to address the toll of climate change.

“I understand the desire to seek funding to mitigate the effects of climate change that has hurt our state in so many ways,” Scott, a moderate Republican in the largely blue state of Vermont, wrote in a letter to lawmakers.

Or, maybe he’s just an idiot squish.

Under the legislation, the Vermont state treasurer, in consultation with the Agency of Natural Resources, would provide a report by Jan. 15, 2026, on the total cost to Vermonters and the state from the emission of greenhouse gases from Jan. 1, 1995, to Dec. 31, 2024. The assessment would look at the effects on public health, natural resources, agriculture, economic development, housing and other areas. The state would use federal data to determine the amount of covered greenhouse gas emissions attributed to a fossil fuel company.

It’s a polluter-pays model affecting companies engaged in the trade or business of extracting fossil fuel or refining crude oil attributable to more than 1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions during the time period. The funds could be used by the state for such things as upgrading stormwater drainage systems; upgrading roads, bridges and railroads; relocating, elevating or retrofitting sewage treatment plants; and making energy efficient weatherization upgrades to public and private buildings. It’s modeled after the federal Superfund pollution cleanup program.

“For too long, giant fossil fuel companies have knowingly lit the match of climate disruption without being required to do a thing to put out the fire,” Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, said in a statement. “Finally, maybe for the first time anywhere, Vermont is going to hold the companies most responsible for climate-driven floods, fires and heat waves financially accountable for a fair share of the damages they’ve caused.”

I’m seriously looking forward to the Unintended Consequences of this. What could they be? Will any companies pull out? Will they refuse to sell to the Vermont state government? Will the cost of energy skyrocket, which would cause the cost of food and other goods to skyrocket?

Read: Vermont Law Charging Fossil Fuels Companies For ‘Climate Change’ Enacted »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Biden’s $320 Million Gaza Pier May Well Be Dead

By William Teach June 1, 2024 – 6:45 am

This has give The New Republic, a hyper-left outlet which has always had a hate-on for Israel, a big sad

Pentagon Admits Biden’s Pathetic Gaza Pier Is Dead

Less than two weeks after its installation, the pier constructed by the United States to facilitate aid into Gaza has been completely removed after it broke apart in the water.

The Pentagon admitted Thursday that the remaining parts of the $320 million boondoggle were dismantled after the pier was damaged in rough waters off the coast of Gaza on May 28, rendering it unusable. Israel has closed several land crossings, preventing aid from getting into the Gaza Strip, and the Israel Defense Forces have fired on food convoys and looked the other way as settlers have blocked aid from entering the remaining open land crossings. The U.S. has thus far resorted to aerial aid drops and, more recently, the manmade pier to facilitate aid, rather than demand Israel open up crossings and crack down on settler obstruction of aid delivery.

Now, according to Pentagon spokesperson Sabrina Singh, the pier is going offline for at least the next week as it is repaired and rebuilt in Ashkelon. Since its construction, the pier had allowed for only 1,000 tons of humanitarian aid to be delivered to Gaza. According to United Nations World Food Programme chief economist Arif Husain, northern Gaza alone requires 4,500 tons of food a month.

Will it come back on line? Will it be repaired and replaced? What little aid actually flowed via the pier was stolen by Hamas

Heck, the thing could barely take a little bit of wave action. Great construction. I wonder if Biden and the rest of his family got a cut from the contractor?

Read: Biden’s $320 Million Gaza Pier May Well Be Dead »

Posted in Current Affairs, Joe Biden | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Canadians Shunning EVs For Fossil Fueled Vehicles

By William Teach May 31, 2024 – 3:00 pm

It’s like they do not want vehicles that perform poorly in snow and cold weather, especially when the Elites attempting to force them to buy EVs do not drive in them

More Canadian car buyers shunning EVs in 2024: J.D. Power

More Canadian car buyers are shunning electric vehicles (EVs) due to tighter household budgets and higher borrowing costs, according to J.D. Power Canada. A new survey by the market research firm says nearly three-quarters are unlikely to consider one for their next purchase.

J.D. Power Canada collected nearly 3,000 responses from consumers in March and April for its third annual Electric Vehicle Consideration study. The results show 72 per cent of automobile shoppers are either “very unlikely” or “somewhat unlikely” to consider an EV for their next purchase. That’s up from 67 per cent last year, and 53 per cent in 2022.

Limited driving distance per charge, or so-called “range anxiety,” was the top concern among those choosing not to buy electric (68 per cent), followed by purchase price (61 per cent), and charging infrastructure (60 per cent). (snip)

J.D. Power Canada found Canadian car buyers remain far less interested in EVs than their American neighbours. This year’s survey found 11 per cent of Canadian new vehicle shoppers are “very likely” to consider an EV. That’s less than half of the 24 per cent of U.S. buyers who said the same.

Ney says part of this comes down to a Canadian preference for all-wheel drive vehicles with longer range.

Very likely doesn’t mean they will actually purchase, though. Even hybrids and plugin-hybrids are not doing that well in Canada.

The federal government aims to phase out sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2035, with interim targets of 20 per cent zero-emissions sales by 2026, and 60 per cent by 2030. (The government’s ZEV classification includes both EVs and PHEVs.)

Yet, how many of these government officials are actually driving one now? Too bad the Credentialed Media folks never ask.

https://x.com/TPostMillennial/status/1796275689974300878

Is he driving one?

Read: Canadians Shunning EVs For Fossil Fueled Vehicles »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 31, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…are tropical plants growing in Canada due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on good guys 1, bad guys 0/

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 44 Comments | Trackback URL

Biden Is Supposedly Coming Up With A Border Clampdown

By William Teach May 31, 2024 – 10:30 am

Why couldn’t he have done this years ago? Is this something mean to be permanent, or, simply an election year stunt?

Biden is said to be finalizing plans for migrant limits as part of a US-Mexico border clampdown

Americans before illegalsThe White House is finalizing plans for a U.S.-Mexico border clampdown that would shut off asylum requests and automatically deny entrance to migrants once the number of people encountered by American border officials exceeded a new daily threshold, with President Joe Biden expected to sign an executive order as early as Tuesday, according to four people familiar with the matter.

The president has been weighing additional executive action since the collapse of a bipartisan border bill earlier this year. The number of illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border has declined for months, partly because of a stepped-up effort by Mexico. Still, immigration remains a top concern heading into the U.S. presidential election in November and Republicans are eager to hammer Biden on the issue.

The Democratic administration’s effort would aim to head off any potential spike in crossings that could occur later in the year, as the fall election draws closer, when the weather cools and numbers tend to rise, two of the people. They were not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing discussions and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

So, this is purely an election year stunt, which will most likely end immediately if Biden wins re-election in November

The move would allow Biden, whose administration has taken smaller steps in recent weeks to discourage migration and speed up asylum processing, to say he has done all he can do to control the border numbers without help from Congress.

I love how the AP is putting this so matter-of-factly, when they would be blasting a Republican for such a blatant election year stunt.

The restrictions being considered are an aggressive attempt to ease the nation’s overwhelmed asylum system, along with a new effort to speed up the cases of migrants already in America and another meant to quicken processing for migrants with criminal records or those who would otherwise be eventually deemed ineligible for asylum in the United States.

This means people are already in the US, and, they should be allowed to deport criminals immediately already.

The people told the AP that the administration was weighing some of the policies directly from a stalled bipartisan Senate border deal, including capping the number of encounters at an average of 4,000 per day over a week and whether that limit would include asylum-seekers coming to the border with appointments through U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s CBP One app. Right now, there are roughly 1,450 such appointments per day.

That would be 1,460,000 illegals per year. Is that supposed to make Americans feel better?

Read: Biden Is Supposedly Coming Up With A Border Clampdown »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrat In Charge Of NY Assembly Comes Out Against ‘Climate Change’ Superfund Act

By William Teach May 31, 2024 – 7:00 am

Is this a case of Carl Heastie introducing common sense, or, is he reading polls which show this will be really unpopular with voters who will turn around and blame Democrats?

NY Assembly speaker throws cold water on Climate Change Superfund Act

New York Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie threw cold water on a bill that would require major energy companies to pay for climate change remediation, saying the measure could ultimately result in higher costs for utility ratepayers.

The Climate Change Superfund Act would require companies that contributed significantly to the buildup of greenhouse gases to pay for part of the mitigation efforts to offset climate change, including major infrastructure projects like water barriers.

The measure was approved in the state Senate, but has stalled in the Assembly.

Heastie says he’s concerned that it would result in higher utility prices, as the energy companies pass down the costs of the new requirements to ratepayers.

“I’ve never in my life seen corporations choose the ratepayer over the stockholder,” Heastie said. “Asking these companies to pay more, it’s going to be, of course, taken out on the ratepayer.”

What company decides to take an overall lower profit when the cost of doing business rises, especially when it comes to government taxes? You can damned well bet all those lawyers and other professions working as elected public servants in the NY Assembly wouldn’t take less money if the government raised their taxes. They’d pass the costs on to their clients. That’s the way life works.

There’s actually been talk in the NY assembly about adding in a requirement that companies cannot pass those taxes/fees on to consumers. What happens then? They leave the state, taking their jobs and revenue with them. What happens when energy companies do the same? That would be decidedly ugly.

Read: Democrat In Charge Of NY Assembly Comes Out Against ‘Climate Change’ Superfund Act »

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove