Biden Declares Checkmate on China in Pacific – Naval Experts Disagree

John Konrad July 6, 2024

by John Konrad (gCaptain) After a blitz of appearances promoting Operation Prosperity Guardian early in the year, the White House has been mostly silent this summer on the US Navy’s considerable efforts in the Red Sea. As the seafarer death count rises in the region, neither presidential candidate has meaningfully addressed the issue. However, yesterday, in an interview with ABC News, Biden claimed the US has “checkmated” China. He also took credit for the AUKUS submarine agreement with Australia and the UK.

In a short twenty-two minute interview, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked Biden how he would feel if Donald Trump wins the Presidential race in January. “I will feel as long as I gave it my all and I did as good a job I know I can do that’s what this is all about,” said Biden. “I think the US and the world is at an inflection point where the things that happen in the next seven years will determine what the next six or seven decades will look like.”

The President continued “I am able to keep the Pacific Basin in a position where we’re at least checkmating China now.”

Stephanopoulos did not question this bold statement.

This is an unexpected statement considering that China has greatly increased aggression against Philippine military resupply missions in the South China Sea and currently has an above-normal naval presence in the waters surrounding Taiwan.

This presidential statement does not account for the fact that China is providing extensive support to Russia and is Iran’s largest trading partner. At first glance, this may not seem relevant to the Pacific Basin, but Russia is a Pacific nation. Additionally, thousands of ships entering and leaving the Pacific Basin have been rerouted around Africa due to Iran-backed Houthi aggression.

Most concerning is that claiming “checkmate” in the Pacific overlooks the fact that China has the largest Navy, largest Coast Guard, largest Naval Militia, and largest shipbuilders in the world. It also has the world’s largest fleets of military controlled merchant ships and owns ports globally.

A small and diminishing minority of naval experts still believe the United States has the ability to win a war in the Pacific against China, but no serious naval expert believes it would be an easy fight. Throughout the administration, gCaptain has interviewed dozens of admirals and naval security experts, and never once have I heard the word “checkmate.”

AUKUS, the trilateral nuclear submarine agreement with Australia and the UK, has been praised by most experts as a significant accomplishment of the current administration. However, Biden has let the buying power of the US Navy plummet against inflation, and many question the survivability of AUKUS without significantly more funding from Congress – including a Democrat controlled Senate – and more leadership and support from the White House. Warships are expensive, and parity with China would require spending more on the Navy over other services, support that Biden and the Secretary of Defense—a former Army general—appear unwilling to provide.

As the complexities of global naval power dynamics intensify, President Biden’s assertion of “checkmating” China in the Pacific Basin appears overly simplistic and detached from reality. With China bolstering its maritime capabilities and exerting influence across key global chokepoints, the United States faces an unprecedented challenge that cannot be met with rhetoric alone. The AUKUS agreement, while a notable achievement, remains vulnerable without substantial and sustained investment. The stakes are high, and the future of freedom of navigation and trade in the Pacific and Red Sea requires on more than just declarations—it requires decisive action and unwavering commitment. Commitment that the US media brushes over and neither US presidential candidate appears willing to discuss at length.

More:

https://gcaptain.com/biden-declares-checkmate-on-china-in-pacific-experts-disagree/

>>21149488

The Protocols were written at the start of antisemitism in Russia, with thousands of Jews fleeing the country and the start of the pogroms, Jewish concentration camps. Setting the scene for antisemitism was Frederick Millingen’s The Conquest of the World by Jews and Hippolytus Lutostansky’s Jews and the Talmud. Both works claimed that the Jews wanted to divide Russia up for themselves. Jews were also blamed for the loss of the Russo-Japanese war and the revolution of 1905.

A member of the Czarist secret police, Professor Serge A Milus, is reported to have edited and initially published the protocols. The Protocols first appeared in a Russian newspaper, Znamya, in 1903. It was published originally in 1905 in a book titled The Great in the Small: The Coming of the Anti-Christ and the Rule of Satan on Earth. This was written by Serge A Nilus. Most agree that the protocols were fabricated sometime between 1897 and 1899 under Pyotr Rachovsky, head of the Russian secret police.

It is generally accepted the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was a forgery. In 1921 the London Times produced conclusive proof that the Protocols were a forgery, describing the Protocols as a “clumsy forgery”. Most of the passages of the Protocols have been taken from a French political satire that never mentioned Jews – Maurice Joly’s Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864). The phrasing between the two texts is almost identical.

The protocols would come to play a significant part in the Jewish Holocaust. They had a serious influence on Adolf Hitler who mentioned them frequently in Mein Kampf. The Nazi party published 23 editions of the Protocols before the start of World War II.

In 1935 a Swiss court declared the Protocols as “ridiculous nonsense” and “obvious forgeries”. The US Senate issued a report in 1964 that the Protocols were fabricated. However even while the Protocols were ridiculed by many, it also had quite a following. In 1974 it was published in India under the title International Conspiracy Against Indians. In 2004 the Protocols were published in Japan. In 2005 an edition of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, authorized by the Syrian Ministry of Information, claims that the Elders of Zion coordinated September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

It is worth noting that the Bible is only mentioned once in the Protocols and that the Old Testament is quoted in Latin. The Protocols also claim that the Jewish elites had a hand in the French revolutions. However, this is cited as evidence largely discrediting the work of the protocols. At the time of the French revolution, there were only a handful of Jews who were, by and large, the subjects of antisemitism. However, this can also be construed in the opposite light, that there was antisemitic behavior followed by unrest and upheaval, meaning that the antisemitism was proven correct.

Despite the declaration that the Protocols are a forgery, there are still many followers, described as Neo-Nazi, White Supremacists and Holocaust deniers. Books based on the Holocaust are disseminated worldwide and has a surprising following in Japan, where there are little Jews. The Arab and Islamic world actively teach the protocols to children. It is often used to justify terrorism against Israeli citizens. There is no denying that it is a forgery, however a very accurate one.

The Case for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

“The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time.” – Henry Ford 1921 in an interview with the Washington Post.

Ford funded the printing of over half a million copies, and the Nazi’s used the protocols to stir up antisemitism.

More:

https://www.conspiracies.net/worlds-oldest-conspiracy-protocols-elders-zion/

Shills are determined to learn the hard way