Ted Cruz Should Move On From Sunday School Geopolitics
If you're going to let your vague memory of a Sunday school slogan guide your foreign policy aims, make sure what you learned was correct.If you're going to let your vague memory of a Sunday school slogan guide your foreign policy aims, make sure what you learned was correct.Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities, kills top commanders; Trump administration emphasizes 'we are not involved'
Israel repeatedly attacked nuclear facilities and military sites across Iran Thursday night, neutralizing elements of the country's nuclear program, air defense systems, and military leadership.
The strikes, which the Trump administration stressed were undertaken unilaterally, have prompted condemnations from Arab nations in the region and a mixed response from American politicians.
The strikes
"Moments ago, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday evening. "This operation will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat."
Over 200 Israel Air Force jets hit targets in the Iranian cities of Tabriz, Kermanshah, Arak, Isfahan, and Natanz, as well as in the capital city of Tehran, where a residential apartment building collapsed, another large building was set ablaze, and military command housing was hit.
'The world is a better place without them.'
According to the Israel Defense Forces, the target in the Natanz area was a uranium enrichment site, "which has operated for years to achieve nuclear weapons capability and houses the infrastructure required for enriching uranium to military-grade levels."
— (@)
The strikes allegedly damaged the underground area of the site, which contains an enrichment hall home to centrifuges, electrical rooms, and supporting infrastructure.
Israel also targeted dozens of radar and surface-to-air missile launchers, crippling the air defense system in the west of the country.
Both Israeli and Iranian authorities confirmed that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Commander Hossein Salami was killed in the strikes. The Israel Defense Forces said they also killed Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces and the second-highest commander after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Gholam Ali Rashid, commander of Khatam-al Anbiya Central Headquarters.
"These are three ruthless mass murderers with international blood on their hands," said the IDF. "The world is a better place without them."
RELATED: Rubio not taking guff from ICC — hammers foreign judges over targeting of US and Israel
Mohammad Pakpour, the brigadier general who commanded the IRGC ground forces, has reportedly taken Salami's place.
Iranian state media indicated that at least two nuclear scientists, Fereydoun Abbasi and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, were also killed in the attacks, reported Reuters.
The American geopolitical intelligence platform Stratfor indicated in an assessment ahead of the attacks that Israel had destroyed most of Iran's S-300 air defense capabilities in its October 2024 strikes, which afforded it an ever-shrinking window of opportunity to destroy parts of Tehran's nuclear program without great risk to its attack aircraft.
Additionally, in recent months, Iranian proxies in the neighborhood have been thinned out — including the Assad regime, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Hezbollah in Lebanon — meaning less opposition in the aftermath.
The day before the strikes, the U.S. State Department issued orders for personnel to depart from embassies and diplomatic offices overseas.
American response
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement shortly after the attacks began, "Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran. We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region."
"Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense," continued Rubio. "President Trump and the administration have taken all necessary steps to protect our forces and remain in close contact with our regional partners."
'They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse!'
"Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel," added Rubio.
Rubio's threat comes just days after Iranian Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh indicated that in the event of a new conflict, "all U.S. bases are within our reach and we will boldly target them in host countries."
President Donald Trump, who was engaged in on-again, off-again negotiations with Tehran, underscored Thursday that he didn't want another conflict in the region.
After noting that "there's a chance of massive conflict," Trump told reporters, "I don't want them going in because that would blow it. Might help it, actually, but also could blow [a potential deal with Iran]."
On Friday morning, Trump stated on Truth Social, "I gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal. I told them, in the strongest of words, to 'just do it,' but no matter how hard they tried, no matter how close they got, they just couldn’t get it done."
"I told them it would be much worse than anything they know, anticipated, or were told, that the United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come," continued the president. "And they know how to use it. Certain Iranian hardliner's [sic] spoke bravely, but they didn't know what was about to happen. They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse!"
'Retaliation for this aggression is Iran's legitimate right.'
"There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end. Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire. No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. God Bless You All!" added Trump.
Whereas House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other lawmakers rallied behind Israel, reiterating that it has a right "to defend itself," some in Washington criticized the move.
Democratic Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.) called the strikes a "reckless escalation." Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wrote, "A war with Iran would make Iraq look like a skirmish. If your goal were to bankrupt America and destabilize the world, dragging us into another endless Middle East war would be the way to do it."
Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck emphasized the surgical nature of the strikes, tweeting:
Israel is incredible. Like surgeons. They must have had people on the ground with targeting. The world would have cheered if we could have taken out the scientists and military leadership in Germany. Same genocidal evil, but watch the media of the world take the side of the mullahs.
Iran responds
The Iranian government claimed that the attacks were a "blatant violation of international law and a terrorist attack" that "resulted in the martyrdom of citizens, commanders, and nuclear scientists."
"Defending Iran's territorial integrity and national sovereignty is the undeniable responsibility of the government and the armed forces," continued the government. "Retaliation for this aggression is Iran's legitimate right, and with the 'powerful hand of the armed forces' and under the command of the Leadership, severe punishment will be inflicted upon Israel."
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose senior adviser was reportedly wounded in the overnight attack, emphasized that the "powerful arm of the Islamic Republic's Armed Forces won't let them go unpunished."
Early Friday, Iran reportedly launched around 100 drones toward Israeli territory in retaliation, which Israeli authorities said they were working to neutralize.
This is a developing story.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
America’s technological horizon
What would happen if the supply of the world’s most advanced chips was suddenly cut off? Supply chains would be devastated, prices of goods would surge, and innovation would come to a screeching halt. This isn't science fiction; it's a potential reality with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company at its center. Based in Taiwan, TSMC currently manufactures 92% of the world's most advanced chips, powering devices from smartphones to automobiles, from health care devices to military equipment. Geopolitically, it's not an exaggeration to say that TSMC is the single most important piece on the global chessboard. The question then becomes: What does this mean for America?
Believe it or not, America was once the leading nation in semiconductor manufacturing and technology up until the 1980s. Then, poor leadership led to a significant decline that resulted in, among other things, manufacturing being moved overseas. This hollowed out America's manufacturing capability. In short, we lost control of the semiconductor manufacturing life cycle to foreign nations. As a result, America has become dangerously dependent on others for what is undoubtedly one of the most critical technologies for any civilization. After 40 years, America has made a move to regain control of its own future.
In May of 2020, TSMC announced its intention to build and operate an advanced semiconductor fabrication facility in America, specifically in Phoenix, Arizona. As of early 2025, TSMC Arizona has begun volume production of its 4-nanometer chip technology in the first constructed fabrication building. Construction of the second fabrication building is well under way. Ultimately, six fabrication buildings will stand in the dry landscape of northern Phoenix. This more than $65 billion project is a massive win for America.
To understand the significance better, let's review the benefits related to the economy, technology, and national security. Starting with the economy, TSMC's investment is projected to generate thousands of direct manufacturing jobs, with estimates ranging from around 6,000 to 7,000. Additionally, it is expected to create tens of thousands more indirect jobs through construction and related industries. Moreover, establishing a major semiconductor manufacturing base in America can catalyze the development of a local supply chain, potentially enticing other technology companies and suppliers to establish operations in the vicinity, thereby fostering a thriving tech manufacturing ecosystem.
The technological and innovation benefits include regaining technological leadership, boosting research and development, and diversifying manufacturing. By manufacturing the most cutting-edge chips in America, the country can reclaim some of its lost ground in semiconductor technology, thereby elevating its standing in global tech innovation. With such close proximity between TSMC and other high-tech companies and research institutions, we can expect increased collaboration, which will likely boost innovation in American semiconductor technology. Perhaps most importantly, with TSMC building advanced chips domestically, supply chain disruptions that start elsewhere in the world can be mitigated or even unfelt.
Last but certainly not least is national security. By reducing reliance on overseas manufacturing for critical technology components, national security is enhanced by mitigating vulnerabilities stemming from Taiwan's geopolitical situation. If you didn't know, China and Taiwan have ongoing political disputes that, if escalated, would be devastating to the entire world, including China. Therefore, domestic production of advanced chips fortifies military technology capabilities, ensures that sensitive technologies are more securely managed, and affords America the luxury of not being so "hands-on" with the geopolitical goings-on between foreign nations.
TSMC's decision to invest heavily in semiconductor manufacturing in America isn't just about business; it's a strategic move with profound implications for economic prosperity, technological sovereignty, and national security. The establishment of these facilities in Arizona marks a significant step toward rekindling America's once-dominant role in the tech industry. The economic benefits are clear, with thousands of jobs and the potential for a vibrant tech ecosystem. Technologically, this move could catapult America back into the forefront of innovation, particularly in semiconductor technology. From a security perspective, it reduces the risks associated with geopolitical tensions, ensuring that the backbone of modern technology isn't held hostage by international disputes. As we move forward, the TSMC project in Arizona not only promises to reshape America’s manufacturing landscape but also reasserts America's commitment to being at the cutting edge of global technology. The future, powered by chips made in America, looks not only brighter but also more secure.
Why a vote for Trump is good for Armenia — and the future of the West
After years of liberal lockstep, Armenian-Americans seem to be breaking for Donald Trump. This is good news, not just for ethnic Armenians but for all Americans. Let me explain.
The first big break with the status quo came from Armenian Weekly columnist Armen Morian, who recently urged his readership to vote for Trump.
But just take a look at a map, and the significance of Armenia’s role as it relates to Western hegemony becomes clear.
Traditionally, Democrat candidates have pushed for Armenian causes, such as recognition of Armenian genocide. This has generally been enough for Armenians, like many other minority American groups, to nod their heads and go along with the empty promises of the liberal platform.
Establishment stooges
Morian acknowledges this habit as he makes a solidly persuasive case for why Armenian-Americans should vote for Trump. The Biden administration is simply the latest iteration of the fundamentally anti-human “Establishment” ideology:
For decades the official ideology of the Establishment has been a globalist one that disdains the cultures, traditions and interests of individual nations, beginning with those of the nation they profess to serve: America. They regard men and nations as interchangeable pawns to be played, regardless, and often in spite of, their unique cultures, histories and traditions, which they see not as determinants of policy but obstacles to be overcome on the path toward advancing their ideology.
For Morian, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's government is but an extension of this liberal establishment, with Pashinyan and his cronies doing the globalist work of trying to normalize relations between the republic and Turkey, harassing the Armenian Apostolic Church, and sowing division between Armenians of the mainland and of the diaspora, among other things.
Donald Trump himself seemed to vindicate Morian's claims a few days later, when he made a post on Truth Social blaming Kamala Harris and the rest of the Biden administration for doing nothing as Islamic Azerbaijan ethnically cleansed 120,000 Armenians from their historic homeland in Artsakh, which was, up until 2023, a disputed enclave within the boundaries of Azerbaijan.
I surmise that advisers like Vivek Ramaswamy and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have had something to do with raising his awareness of the crisis in that part of the world.
As an ethnic Armenian myself, these developments are all fine and dandy. If the Armenian-American community can wake up from its liberal slumber and manage to find its conservative spine, I can call that progress.
Why you should care
But why should you care? Why should you care about the political goings-on of the Republic of Armenia and about the Armenians in general? After all, Armenians make up a tiny minority in America. Their vote most likely won’t make a dent in the election.
Likewise, the Western perception of Armenia and Armenians is barely existent, if it even exists at all. What does this tiny nation located at the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East have to do with you?
Well, allow me to appeal to your sense of geopolitics. On the surface, Armenia comes off as a backwater post-Soviet country tucked away from the rest of Europe under the Caucasus mountain range. It doesn’t contribute much in terms of GDP, as its 1991 statehood came with significant disadvantages: It's completely landlocked on all sides and neighbored by two bloodthirsty enemies — Turkey and Azerbaijan.
But just take a look at a map, and the significance of Armenia’s role as it relates to Western hegemony becomes clear.
Armenia is the lone obstacle standing in the way of Turkey’s pursuit of establishing a pan-Turanic land and sea bridge that would span Europe and Asia. Contrary to public perception, the bonds these nations share are less based on Islam than they are on ethnicity.
The pan-Turanic menace
The nations highlighted in the graphic are all demographically composed of ethnically Turkic peoples. And if they were to establish that pan-Turanic land and sea bridge, you can bet your bottom dollar they would throw the power of that newfound Turanic empire around.
Some scenarios you can expect with the rise of the pan-Turanic empire:
- Turkey abuses its position in NATO even more, extracting any and all demands it may have due to its new status as a trading world power.
- The European states stand to pay even more for the oil they get from Azerbaijan, risking a position of total indentured dependence.
- Even more immigrants from Central Asia flood Europe.
- The U.S. is forced to comply with Turkish demands, norms, and cultural exports, so as not to lose out on major trade routes and markets.
- The eventual Islamified Turkification of all icons, symbols, and cultural artifacts the West holds dear and sacred.
And if you think this isn’t coming down the pipeline, just look at both Greece and Armenia as your prime examples of what happens when Turks become the power brokers.
The Hagia Sophia is no longer a church. Every major Armenian church and historical site has either been destroyed or retroactively cast as an ancient Turkish site. The ruthless predation of the Turkic world has remained only regional for Christians up until now, but it can very easily become international, very soon.
What stands in the way is Armenia. That’s it.
Very stable genius
That is why the Azeris just cleaned out 120,000 Armenians from their ancestral homeland with military force. It’s why the traitorous, globalist Armenian government is pushing to “normalize” relations between itself and Turkey and Azerbaijan. And yes, it’s even why Iran considers Armenia’s territorial integrity a “red line” that it would not tolerate Azerbaijan breaching.
It’s also why I want you, the reader, to be aware of this pressing issue.
If Donald Trump becomes president, especially with advisers like Vivek Ramaswamy and RFK Jr. on his team, there will be a real opportunity to ward off this threat.
What I’m pushing for is not more taxpayer-funded aid to yet another region of the world. Instead, I'd like us to siphon the power, influence, and money away from antagonists like Turkey and Azerbaijan, whom we help out a lot.
The Middle East can be very stable, if we want it to be. That it happens to be occupied and governed by non-Christians is an anomaly — for much of history, Christians were in charge. A restoration of a Christian Middle East must be on the table as an agenda item for the next administration.
Biden signs 10-year defense pact with Ukraine, greasing its path to NATO membership
President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy struck a deal Thursday in Italy on the sidelines of the G7 summit, committing the United States to deepening "security and defense cooperation [with Ukraine] and collaborating closely with Ukraine's broad network of security partners" for the next ten years.
The White House characterized the pact, which further paves the eastern European nation's way toward membership in NATO, as a "powerful signal of our strong support for Ukraine now and into the future."
At a joint press conference with Zelenskyy, Biden said, "Our goal is to strengthen Ukraine's credible defense and deterrence capabilities for the long term."
While Biden stressed it "makes a lot of sense for Ukraine to be able to take out or combat what is going across that border," he did, however, rule out Ukraine expanding its use of American missiles in Russia.
"In terms of long-range weapons ... we have not changed our position on that," said Biden, who reiterated further that American troops would also not be committed to Ukraine's defense.
Although Biden's potential successor has expressed interest in a swift resolution to the Russia-Ukraine war and in European powers shouldering more of the financial burden for their own defense, Zelenskyy expressed confidence that perceived popular support for Ukraine will translate into continued fidelity to the pact.
"If the people are with us, any leader will be with us in this struggle for freedom," said Zelenskyy.
As the pact is only between the Biden and Zelenskyy administrations and will not be ratified by Congress, the next president could tear up the pact upon securing the White House.
The agreement comes just days after the Biden administration lifted a long-standing ban on arming a controversial Ukrainian brigade founded and shaped by neo-Nazis and midway through a year in which Congress appropriated $61 billion for military and economic aide to Ukraine — $14 billion of which was for advanced weapon systems and defense equipment and $13.7 billion of which is so that Kiev can buy American defense systems.
Biden has also committed to help 'develop Ukraine's capabilities to counter Russian and any other propaganda and disinformation.'
The agreement also comes in the wake of the European parliamentary elections, in which several right-leaning parties critical of the EU's approach to the Russian war against Ukraine made significant gains and amid waning interest among eastern European countries such as Slovakia to continue supporting Kiev's defensive campaign.
Although apparently happy to defer much of the cost to the U.S., wealthy powers at the G7 committed to a $50 billion loan to Ukraine backed by confiscated Russian assets.
The pact states in its preamble that "the security of Ukraine is integral to the security of the Euro-Atlantic region," and it is necessary to "preserve and promote Ukraine’s sovereignty, democracy, and capacity to deter and respond to current and future external threats."
In addition to advancing "trade and investment ties," the pact will build on the existing security partnerships facilitated under the Strategic Defense Framework between the Pentagon and Ukraine's defense ministry in 2021.
This means more help with military training; increased industrial cooperation; continued joint planning "to confront threats"; help with the procurement of squadrons of modern fighter aircraft; and material and logistical assistance with the defense of Ukraine's sovereignty and borders.
Biden has also committed to help "develop Ukraine's capabilities to counter Russian and any other propaganda and disinformation." This assistance would ostensibly be extra to what the Biden administration is already shelling out to help Ukrainian outfits target individuals and entities believed to be unsympathetic or antipathetic.
Blaze News recently reported that the Biden State Department is funding a Ukrainian NGO that has compiled a list of American politicians, activists, and media outlets — including Blaze Media — who have allegedly shared "Russian disinformation" or made "anti-Ukrainian statements."
The pact links a "just end to the war" to Ukraine's maintenance of its internationally recognized borders and territorial waters; reaffirms "Ukraine's future is in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)"; and emphasizes the importance of using sanctions and export controls against Russia, which some critics say have pushed the Slavic nation further into the arms of communist China and have proven costly for Europe.
'NATO expansion has not improved American security.'
To execute this pact, the White House indicated the Biden administration will look to Congress to continue funding Ukraine "over the long term."
There are apparently 15 other countries with similar security pacts with Ukraine, including Germany, Britain, and France.
The response to the agreement has so far been mixed.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) suggested on X that Biden was "risking another US forever war."
"By supporting Ukraine's NATO membership, he commits future US servicemembers to Ukraine's conflicts," continued Paul. "It's time to put America 1st, seek diplomatic solutions, and protect our people and economy."
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) noted that "NATO expansion has not improved American security."
— (@)
Others emphasized the importance of helping Ukraine see its way through to victory.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stated Thursday, "The outcome of Ukraine’s fight will set the trajectory for global security for decades. We must continue to stand up to Putin's aggression and atrocities. Let me be clear: Ukraine matters to the United States and to the entire world."
The State Department said the pact was "a historic show of support for Ukraine’s long-term security that furthers commitments made under the G7 Joint Declaration of Support to Ukraine in July 2023 and the President’s approval of the Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act this spring."
Zelenskyy suggested earlier this year that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed since the outset of the invasion, although the BBC indicated U.S. intelligence suggests the number is far higher. As of April, the BBC's Russian unit indicated over 50,000 Russian soldiers had been slain. Between the two countries, there have been hundreds of thousands more combatants injured in the fighting.
For two points of contrast: Pentagon data indicates that between Oct. 7, 2011, and Dec. 31, 2014, 2,354 American service members died during Operation Enduring Freedom, and 20,149 were wounded in action. Between March 2003 and August 2010, 4,431 American service members died in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and 31,994 were injured.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Officials worry that foreign interests might be behind purchase of nearly $1 billion-worth of land around major USAF base
An investment group has snatched up roughly 52,000 acres of land — much of dubious agricultural value — around a critical U.S. Air Force base northeast of San Francisco.
These acquisitions and the investors' obscurity have government officials worried about possible ulterior motivations as well as security risks.
Travis Air Force Base in Solano County, on the southwestern edge of the Sacramento Valley, is known as the "Gateway to the Pacific." Its host unit is the 60th Air Mobility Wing and is home to the 621st Contingency Response Wing, the 349th Air Mobility Wing, and over 50 partner organizations. The base itself has just over 7,600 active USAF personnel and 4,250 Air Force Reserve personnel.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the investment group Flannery Associates has spent around $1 billion in recent years to become the largest landowner in Solano County, acquiring some 52,000 acres across 300 parcels of land near the base, 20 of which surround Travis.
The company has admitted in court filings to paying prices of "multiples of fair market value" for the land.
Solano County Supervisor Mitch Mashburn said, "The majority of the land they're purchasing is dry farmland. ... I don't see where that land can turn a profit to make it worth almost a billion dollars in investment."
Rio Vista Mayor Ronald Kott told the Journal, "Nobody can figure out who they are. ... Whatever they're doing—this looks like a very long-term play."
A spokesman for the base indicated that USAF officials "are aware of the multiple land purchases near the base and are actively working internally and externally with other agencies."
The USAF's Foreign Investment Risk Review Office has reportedly been looking into the group's acquisitions, but has not yet been able to determine precisely who is backing Flannery Associates.
An attorney for the group, whose CEO was listed with the California Secretary of State's Office as Andrew Lerner, claimed Flannery is controlled by American citizens and that 97% of its invested capital derives from U.S. investors. The remainder is allegedly from British and Irish investors.
"Any speculation that Flannery’s purchases are motivated by the proximity to Travis Air Force Base" is unfounded, the attorney told the Journal.
The group's attorney previously told Solano County that Flannery "is owned by a group of families looking to diversify their portfolio from equities into real assets, including agricultural land in the western United States," reported the Daily Republic.
Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), on the House Armed Services Committee's readiness panel, said, "We don’t know who Flannery is, and their extensive purchases do not make sense to anybody in the area. ... The fact that they're buying land purposefully right up to the fence at Travis raises significant questions."
This is not the first land grab in recent months to inspire concern.
The Washington Examiner recently noted that China, the U.S.'s preeminent adversary on the world stage, has been buying up vast swathes of American land. Whereas in 2011, when Chinese investors owned 69,295 acres of American land, by year-end 2021, they controlled nearly 400,000 acres.
A Beijing-linked group recently attempted to buy 300 acres of land, some 20 minutes away from the Grand Forks Air Force Base. This prompted bipartisan backlash as well as vexation amongst local airmen.
CNBC reported that Maj. Jeremy Fox circulated a memo inside the Air Force, claiming the purchase would both be a security threat to the U.S. and fit a pattern of "Chinese subnational espionage campaigns using commercial economic development projects to get close to Department of Defense installations."
Fox wrote, "Some of the most sensitive elements of Grand Forks exist with the digital uplinks and downlinks inherent with unmanned air systems and their interaction with space-based assets."
According to Fox, the USAF would be more or less unable to detect surveillance on drone and satellite transmissions being waged by potential Chinese actors.
"Passive collection of those signals would be undetectable, as the requirements to do so would merely require ordinary antennas tuned to the right collecting frequencies. ... This introduces a grave vulnerability to our Department of Defense installations and is incredibly compromising to US National Security," wrote Fox.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told the Examiner earlier this year, "Allowing Chinese companies with connections to the party-state to buy strategically important land in the United States is a national security threat. ... We need to treat the Chinese Communist Party for what it is — our greatest adversary."
Extra to land grabs, the Chinese regime has: agents conducting illegal police operations in the U.S. along with harassment and espionage campaigns; a hand in the deadly influx of fentanyl across the southern border via their informal partners in the Mexican cartels; and has flown reconnaissance flyovers through American skies.
Microsoft publicly revealed earlier this summer that the Chinese communist regime has also taken significant steps to undermine critical American infrastructure. These attacks — using malicious computer code that enables remote access to various devices — appear to be a pre-emptive attempt by the genocidal state to develop the upper hand should the two nations soon come to blows.
While attempting to corrode American capability and making clandestine incursions into the U.S., Chinese officials have also issued threats.
Concerning the land grabs in Solano County, Garamendi and fellow California Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson have pushed for a probe by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., reported the Journal.
The U.S. Agriculture Department has also pressed for answers concerning Flannery's backers.
The Journal indicated that local and federal officials' inability to learn the identities of those in the Flannery group is in part due to the fact that Delaware-registered LLCs, such as Flannery Associates, do not have to publicly disclose the identity of their owners.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Barbie Gets A Lesson In Geopolitics
Hollywood can no longer claim obliviousness or pretend to be naive about its role in spreading communist China’s propaganda.Europeans unwilling to back US in war with China: Poll
The U.S. fought valiantly to liberate Europe from totalitarian powers in the 20th century and footed the bill for its latest fight with Russia.
Now, confronted with the threat of an increasingly aggressive and genocidal threat in the east, it appears America may not be able to rely on its continental beneficiaries to return the favor.
The European Council on Foreign Relations just published the results of an extensive poll of over 6,000 people across 11 European Union member nations — Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and Sweden — "to understand how European citizens see their place in the world today."
In the event of a war between the U.S. and China — as might result from a Chinese invasion of the island nation of Taiwan — only a quarter of European respondents, on average, "would like their country, or Europe, to take America’s side."
62% of Europeans surveyed would like to remain neutral, notwithstanding their nations' ongoing infiltration by Chinese communist spies, subversion by illegal Chinese police operations, and economic coercion by Beijing.
The survey also found:
- On average, 3.3% of European citizens regard China as an ally "that shares our interests and values";
- 43% recognize China as a "necessary partner ... with which we must strategically cooperate";
- 7% of both French and German respondents suggested Europe or their countries should support China against the U.S in a war, whereas only 4.7% of Europeans, on average, would want to side with the genocidal communists;
- Bulgarians, the most anti-American of the bunch, were the most likely to regard China as a "necessary partner" (58%) and tied for most likely to regard China as an ally (8%);
- Swedes were the most hawkish on China, with 26% calling it an adversary "with which we are in conflict" and 24% calling it a rival "with which we need to compete"; and
- 35% of Swedes and 31% of Poles would want to support the U.S. in a war with China over Taiwan.
Jana Puglierin and Pawel Zerka, senior policy fellows at the ECFR, indicated the notion of neutrality was naïve, writing, "While remaining neutral in the case of great power confrontation is an appealing idea, a US-China confrontation would have a massive impact on Europe’s trade and economy at a minimum and European countries would certainly not be neutral bystanders. In addition, the US would likely demand loyalty from Europeans, reminding them of America’s pivotal role in ensuring a strong Western response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine."
There appear to be two dominant schools of thought in Europe: de-risking and deference. While both entail some form of continued appeasement of Beijing, the latter appears to involve more mental gymnastics on the part of leaders who routinely pay lip service to the importance of democracy and human rights.
The ECFR indicated that European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron exemplify the two varieties of collaborators.
Von der Leyen acknowledged in a March speech that China is ramping up its military posture, its policies of disinformation, and economic and trade coercion, stressing, "These escalatory actions point to a China that is becoming more repressive at home and more assertive abroad."
While recognizing the destabilization and repression China threatens, von der Leyen went on to say, "I believe it is neither viable – nor in Europe's interest – to decouple from China. Our relations are not black or white – and our response cannot be either. This is why we need to focus on de-risk – not de-couple."
De-risking, according to von der Leyen, will require addressing "distortions created by China's state capitalist system," reassessing the terms of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment, altogether reducing dependence on China, and limiting economic and national security exposure "in the context of China's explicit fusion of its military and commercial sectors."
Macron, alternatively, makes von der Leyen out to be a hawk with his deferential stance to Beijing.
The ECFR suggested that Macron is willing to prioritize close economic relations, even if that compromises allied nations.
"Macron spoke of reviving the strategic and global partnership with China and deliberately avoided critical remarks on the subject of Taiwan. Like Scholz before him, Macron was accompanied by a business delegation, which concluded numerous agreements in China," reported the ECFR. "Macron’s message to Xi was clear: Paris wants close economic relations with Beijing, even if China does not oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and continues to maintain close relations with the Kremlin."
The New York Times reported that during his China trip in April, Macron reiterated his opposition to the economic decoupling from China favored by the U.S. and his preference for a world where American dominance was minimized or zapped altogether.
According to the ECFR's findings, "European citizens are more on Team Macron than Team von der Leyen. They do not see China as a power that challenges and wants to undermine Europe, and they do not buy into the 'democracy versus autocracy' framework promoted by the Biden administration."
Among the 11 nations where citizens were polled, it appears Germany, Sweden, France, and Denmark are outliers in terms of their citizenry recognizing China as a "rival" or an "adversary."
The rest reckon China to be an "ally" or a "partner."
The Euro-Sino love-in could be disrupted, however, if Beijing officially begins arming Russia.
"On average, 41 per cent would be ready to sanction Beijing in that event, even if that meant seriously damaging Western economies. A minority of 33 per cent, on average, would oppose this," reported the ECFR.
How Democrats’ Push For Electric Cars Endangers National Security
Democrats’ highly expensive environmental policies have been developed without any meaningful strategic thinking or analyses about raw materials and geopolitics.10 Things The U.S. Can Start Doing Right Now To Counter China’s Dominance
One of the biggest challenges presented by China as compared to the USSR is the depth of the Chinese penetration of America’s economy, politics, culture, and society.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com