news

Incredible, even the US Congress now admits that Australia will probably not get the AUKUS submarines. And they propose an alternative that achieves the feat of being even far worse than AUKUS (which was already a terrible deal).

In a new report (which you can find here: crsreports.congress.gov/prod…) the US Congressional Research Service admits that the country's industrial base is very far from achieving the target of building 2.33 submarines per year needed to build replacement submarines for those sold to Australia: in fact the rate is currently only "1.2 to 1.4".

Given this, they actually propose to just forgo the sale of submarines entirely (!) and go for an alternative approach where the US deploys US submarines manned by the US Navy to Australia instead: "up to eight additional Virginia-class SSNs would be built, and instead of three to five of them being sold to Australia, these additional boats would instead be retained in U.S. Navy service and operated out of Australia."

But since they don't want to miss out on the Australian money meant for the subs, they conveniently propose that Australia instead spends it on other US military products: "Australia, instead of using funds to purchase, build, operate, and maintain its own SSNs, would instead invest those funds in other military capabilities—such as, for example, long-range anti-ship missiles, drones, loitering munitions, B-21 long-range bombers, or other long-range strike aircraft".

All this for the purpose of "performing military missions for both Australia and the United States".

So essentially, from Australia's standpoint, the new deal would mean:

• Zero control over the submarines operated on its territory since it'd all be manned by the U.S. Navy
• Australia still spends a similar eyewatering amount of money ($368 billion) on US military equipment that is mostly "long-range": "long-range anti-ship missiles", "B-21 long-range bombers", "long-range strike aircraft". Meaning by definition not used for the defense of Australia but undoubtedly to attack China. Which is pretty clear: China is mentioned 44 times in the document...
• This US military equipment is to be used, as per the document, to "perform military missions for both Australia and the United States" which is extremely unusual: militaries normally don't perform missions FOR another military. Allied countries might perform missions alongside each other or in support of each other, but not explicitly "for" each other.

How could Australia possibly justify such a deal to its public? AUKUS was already, according to former Australian PM Paul Keating the “worst deal in all history” because it'd "turn Australia into the 51st state of the United States", but this new proposal would strip away even the illusion of Australian sovereignty.

https://nitter.poast.org/RnaudBertrand/status/1847162340829262239

Why did that drone dodge

Okay, I have been obsessing over this Tiktok for over an hour. When they say that Zionists do everything to prove to the world that every single anti-Semitic stereotype is true, they really do fucking mean it.

Behold the Tiktok in question: https://www.tiktok.com/@elongilad/video/7405549775493401873

Seriously absorb what he's saying. I literally thought he was just some anti-Semitic crank until I searched for him online and it turns out he writes for Zionist newspapers. And it's not just him that describes this concept since I've found newspaper articles as well.

From this dude and other articles I've read, Zionist society apparently exalts the cheater and liar while being an honorable person invites only contempt and makes you a mark that will be exploited by others. They try to tone it down by saying that it's only applicable to stuff like cheating on your taxes or cutting in line, but that shit 100% goes way deeper especially when we're talking about a genocidal settler colony.

This is also a clue into why the Zionists actually thought it was a good idea to release the video of Sinwar's martyrdom. If we take this concept of frayer seriously, then from the warped perspective of Zionists, Sinwar was the ultimate frayer: a man who gave his life for the sake of others. In their eyes, he's the ultimate sucker and the video of his final moments on Earth as the ultimate sucker who could've send a bunch of low level Hamas grunts to die in his place should've invited universal mockery and contempt.

"Israel invented cherry tomatoes"

Wrong response: that is not true. Here is some proofs...

Right response: Idgaf. Fuck tomatoes and fuck israhell

The greatest gift the enemy and occupation can give me is to assassinate me… so I can go to Allah as a martyr by their hand. Today, I’m 59 years old and truthfully, I prefer to be killed by an F-16 or missiles than die from COVID, from a stroke, heart attack, car accident, or any other thing people die from… As you know, at 60 we are closer to death, to dying from natural causes… I prefer to die a martyr than to die a meaningless death.

—Yahya Sinwar

Israel is barring entire aid organizations after their doctors were featured in a NYT article about the conditions they saw in Gaza

So a priest, a monk and an imam walk into an SMO

Speaking of Sinwar, even in Gaza there has been a wave of trash floating over people about him, a lot would curse him the past few months because they believed he was sitting comfortably while they had to endure the war, this breaks that. And I don't think anyone was expecting this 62 year old man to have been fighting in the front lines, you don't understand how dumb israel is for showing us how they killed him, they disproved the same lies they've spread for an entire year, a cowar rat living in the tunnels surrounded by human shields turns out to have been the entire time in the safest place can be when fighting western forces... the front lines