[YouTube] On the morning December 21st of 1866, a squad of US Army cavalrymen sets out in pursuit of a raiding party composed of Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapahoe warriors under the direction of the legendary Chief Red Cloud. By noon, every single soldier will lie dead on a rocky hillside near the fort.
What happened that day? Who was responsible for the massacre? And what role would this engagement player in the greater part of what would go on to be known as “Red Cloud’s War”?
#2
...Son Of The Morning Star has an incredible account of the Fetterman Massacre, including a bit of grim humor - apparently it was assumed there would be a war party exactly where it ambushed Fetterman, so he was told in no uncertain terms don't go that way several times during the planning.
As Fetterman led his men out the gate, he was told once more, do NOT take that route.
And shortly afterwards, the fort commander, suspecting a problem, sent a rider out to catch up with Fetterman with written orders that in no uncertain terms was he to take that route.
The rider came back far too quickly, stating that he could not deliver the orders to Fetterman for he had already gone straight down the forbidden route.
#5
4 "Massacre?"
You mean they started a fight and lost?
This is like Gaza rats complaining they got "massacred".
Posted by: Angomonter Slosh8600 2026-11-13 09:15
IIRC, the eventual verdict was that as Fetterman made his way through the Forbidden Route, a small handful of warriors rides out and proceeds to shoot and miss the troops while simultaneously staying just out of range. Fetterman - enraged that these aborigines are taunting the United States Army - orders a pursuit. The warriors ride off at full speed, Fetterman follows, and finds himself in a tactical cul-de-sac surrounded by the REST of the warriors.
[Townhall] The widespread fraud in Minnesota's Somali community is not breaking news. At least $9 billion was stolen from taxpayers via the state's welfare programs including Medicaid, housing, and even the autism programs. Millions were lost to the "Feeding Our Future" scandal, too. We learned last year that almost $400 million was funneled to al-Shabaab ... the Islamic version of the old Somali warlord... , the Somali-based Islamic terrorist group, and CBS News reported that millions were spent on luxury cars, lakefront homes, and sent to banks in China and Kenya.
Now we're learning Somalia is on the brink of famine, and the cuts to USAID and other programs mean America isn't going to help. Nor should we.
Here's more:
Right now, that system is warning about the rising possibility of famine in Somalia. And for the first time since the 1980s, the U.S. government, faced with this kind of disaster, has done nothing and apparently plans to continue doing nothing.
In Somalia, back-to-back droughts that began last year have killed more than 1 million livestock. Somalis—most of whom are goat, sheep, and camel herders—can’t expect help from their government, which is corrupt and devotes most of its small budget to fighting al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda’s Somali affiliate. The terrorist group controls a third of the country, including land along rivers, where it has allowed major irrigation projects to fall into disrepair. Throughout Somalia, international assistance is newly scarce or nonexistent. Half a million children now have severe acute malnutrition, the last stage of hunger before death, when organs start failing and irreversible brain damage typically occurs. And Somalia’s emergency-management agency predicts that, thanks in large part to the Super El Niño, the coming months may bring the worst flash floods the country has seen this century. Floodwaters could drown crops and animals, and make it much harder for the humanitarian workers who remain in Somalia to reach the tens of thousands of people living in displacement camps, some of whom would likely begin starving to death.
But readers added context via a Community Note that points out America sent more than $7 billion in aid to Somalia from 2015 to 2025. The cuts came amid allegations of waste, theft, and diversion, including the destruction of a U.S.-funded warehouse. You can see a breakdown of the money sent to Somalia here.
Where did all that money go?
In January, the U.S. suspended assistance to the Somali government, alleging it seized food aid. According to the News Agency that Dare Not be Named, Somali officials destroyed the American-funded warehouse belonging to the World Food Program and took 76 metric tons of food aid intended for citizens.
The last time we sent troops, they murdered them. And we haven't forgotten.
Compare that to places like Japan, who got about $24 billion in aid, when adjusted for inflation, after being nuked twice, Molotov cocktailed, and losing 25 percent of its armed forces.
Prediction Jan. 2027 ->
Democrats, NGO's and the MSM demanding the US "Save Somalia", and US troops must be sent to guard food shipment sent to fight off Starvation.
All while calling Trump, Republicans and the 70+% of the US Citizens that actually pays taxes, Racists.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
11/13/2026 12:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Just the News Jan 26:
Federal and state law enforcement officials said the Somali cash flows were well known in counterterrorism circles since the 2016-18 timeframe because of concerns some of the money might head to al-Qaeda offshoot groups like AlShabaab and Boko Haram, but most tracking of the money ended when the money reached Dubai because of a lack of interest and curiosity during the Biden administration even as the transfers grew in size.
[Reuters] BEIJING, Nov 13 (Reuters) - Nvidia has said US export controls have effectively shut it out of China's AI data-centre market, but a Reuters review has identified more than $3 billion in Chinese computing projects built around the American chipmaker's restricted processors.
The projects, stretching from China's wealthy coastal technology hubs to remote western provinces, reveal the scale of continuing demand for Nvidia hardware even as Washington seeks to curb Beijing's access to the technology powering the global artificial-intelligence boom.
The Reuters review examined more than 150 Chinese procurement notices, investment plans, construction contracts and corporate disclosures, identifying projects and equipment agreements with a combined reported value exceeding 23 billion yuan ($3.2 billion).
The findings paint a detailed picture of how deeply Nvidia technology remains embedded in China's AI expansion. They reveal the company's technology reaches well beyond China's largest tech firms, into local government-backed ventures, universities and regional computing centres.
The estimate includes planned investments and signed contracts as well as completed installations. It covers buildings, power systems and other infrastructure, and does not reflect spending on Nvidia chips alone.
China's commerce ministry and Nvidia did not immedietely respond to Reuters request for comment.
The findings come a day after Nvidia co-founder Jensen Huang resigned as chief executive amid a scandal over his relationship with a Chinese businesswoman suspected by US authorities of intelligence ties to Beijing.
Huang, a vocal advocate of easing export restrictions, said last year Nvidia's market share in China had fallen from 95% to zero. The company has also excluded China data-centre computing revenue from its forecasts, citing regulatory uncertainty.
That does not mean Chinese demand has disappeared. While Nvidia's statements address its own ability to compete and sell directly in China, the documents Reuters reviewed show Chinese customers continuing to plan purchases and, in some cases, operating restricted processors.
Sunny Cheung, an analyst at the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, said Reuters' findings reinforce his own view on enforcement: "Washington must stop focusing solely on who buys the chips on the surface and start examining who ultimately uses the computing power—and for what purpose."
[PJ] America's historical relationship with its super-rich has alternated between admiration and resentment. Americans have traditionally loved a rags-to-riches story, as the cultural mythos, from Horatio Alger novels in the 19th century to modern-day profiles of self-made tech founders, celebrates upward mobility as proof that the economic system works.
Yet, that same public harbors an ingrained suspicion of inherited wealth or fortunes built through market manipulation, viewing unearned privilege as fundamentally un-American.
"Trust fund babies" are often despised, especially if the kid shows an arrogance of privilege that puts him above the law, as was the case with the Kennedys. But ambivalence toward massive wealth also reflects a healthy skepticism about money's corrupting power and its inherently anti-democratic nature.
We have never been an egalitarian people, although we worship at the altar of equality. We talk a good game about creating a "level playing field" for all, but we honor that idea in the breach. In fact, we've never been able to reconcile our notions of individual liberty with a broad definition of "equality for all." To create that kind of society, a powerful arbiter must broker a compromise that inevitably destroys both: liberty is choked by regulation, and true equality is undermined by the very arbiter granting it.
We've only been at it for 250 years. We'll get there eventually.
[FOX] DENVER — Congressional Democrats are heading into the next two years with a choice: focus on investigating President Donald Trump and his administration or look for ways to work with him to deliver results for Americans.
The party, after sweeping pickups in last week's midterms, right away warned Trump and Republicans to "lawyer up" and in the following days began outlining investigations into the administration, including its handling of immigration enforcement, the president’s business interests and the Justice Department's actions.
But newly elected Democrats and strategists at the "What’s Next" conference in Denver told Fox News Digital that their party should seek opportunities to work with Trump.
The new guard argues that voters who elected them into office want to see results over partisan fights.
Hosted by Majority Democrats, the conference brought Democratic leaders, strategists and rising figures together to discuss the party’s direction after the midterms. Organizers billed it as an independent conversation about what Democrats should do next.
Iowa Gov.-elect Rob Sand cautioned his party against making investigations and impeachments the focus of its new political momentum, particularly when the underlying issues have already been reported.
Asked what he did not want Democrats to do as they take office, Sand said he did not want to see them "throwing bombs" at Republicans. Voters, he said, need public servants focused on improving their lives.
"There are people who are really struggling right now, whose lives have been ruined by high gas prices, by all kinds of policy choices, and they need results," Sand told Fox News Digital. "They need public servants who are actually trying to serve the public."
Sand said he questioned the value of investigating matters already covered by the media instead of pursuing work that could help ordinary people. Asked if that meant working with the Trump administration, he said yes.
"He’s there, he was put there two years ago. He’s gonna be there another two years," Sand said. "You don’t get to pick and choose who you work with. The people do."
Sen.-elect James Talarico, D-Texas, called on Democrats to focus on what they can accomplish now, even as they push for longer-term reforms.
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029, but the American people cannot wait two years for change," Talarico said. "We must work with President Trump."
He urged Democrats to make the Republican president's final two years in office "the most productive of any presidency in American history."
Talarico, who became the first Democrat in nearly four decades to win a statewide election in Texas, also warned against getting "bogged down in the same petty fights."
"The American people are demanding change, and in this election, they chose our party to deliver it," Talarico said.
Democratic strategist Lis Smith offered a related caution, saying the election was "largely a referendum on Donald Trump and less a validation of Democrats and their policies."
Smith, a senior advisor for Majority Democrats, said the party still needs to earn voters’ trust and should focus on costs and corruption rather than treating their wins as a mandate for policies they did not campaign on. She also said that Democrats didn't sweep because of their winning message, but rather because fed-up voters cast their ballots as a rebuke of Trump and his policies.
"We should not read into these election results as a mandate for far left policies advocated only by a handful of candidates," Smith emphasized.
[TheWeek] From biblical times to Britain's MI5 memo, history is replete with examples of the honey trap still ...
Few espionage techniques have proven to be as formidable and enduring as the ’honey trap.’ Across centuries, changing technologies, and evolving geopolitical rivalries, intelligence services have repeatedly relied on personal relationships, emotional manipulation, and sexual leverage to gain access to information that could not be obtained through conventional means. Often dismissed as a cinematic trope populated by glamorous spies and dramatic betrayals, the honey trap remains one of the most enduring instruments in the intelligence toolkit.
History is replete with examples. The biblical story of Samson and Delilah is perhaps the most famous illustration of personal intimacy being used to extract strategic secrets.
Modern popular culture only amplified these narratives, from the femme fatales of early European spy thrillers to the succession of seductresses who populate Cold War fiction and James Bond films. Yet the persistence of such stories is not merely a reflection of artistic imagination. They endure because they draw from methods that intelligence agencies have repeatedly employed in the real world.
#1
Taking out powerful male leadership figures appears to be a common goal. No, the brilliant General David Petreus would never become president or hold any other high-level Washington office. 2012 was a well engineered turning point. The "Honey" usually fades into history unscathed.
JD? Bye
[NY Post] President Donald Trump has it entirely right: The days for seeking "a deal with Iran" indeed "have long since passed."
Tehran refuses to back off what Secretary of State Marco Rubio calls its "outrageous and ridiculous" demands, such as insisting it be handed a stronger position — including the right to toll Strait of Hormuz traffic — than it had before Operation Epic Fury kicked off.
So the prez will stick with the embargo and other sanctions to keep choking Iran’s economy, leaving it unable to significantly reconstitute its nuclear program, and wait — with the option of other combat operations where appropriate.
Some see this as a slap at Vice President JD Vance, who (according to Turkish officials) had been reaching out to Tehran for fresh high-level talks.
But that’s not how Trump framed it in his Truth Social post Thursday: Rather, he just sees the veep’s anti-fraud work (tackling "large scale criminal activity") as far more productive, recovering billions for the taxpayers, than wasting time on Iran outreach.
True. Also, his negotiations killed time until the elections were over without doing anything so silly as committing America to anything, so they achieved President Trump’s purpose, no matter what the vice president thought he was doing.
After all, Tehran torpedoed Vance’s last deal, this summer’s Memorandum of Understanding, by attacking ships in the Gulf; the president won’t be played for a sucker again.
Vance wasn’t wrong to say the war was a big reason for Republicans’ wipeout in the midterms, the prez has noted — but Trump has also declared he’d do it again, because (as he’s said consistently for decades) Iran can’t be allowed to go nuclear.
One White House official tells The Post that the post was a message to Iran, not Vance: "The Iranians should understand that the president is in the dominant position and able to exercise real strategic patience here"; if Trump "ever sees a smart deal worth looking at, he’ll send the VP to get it done."
Tehran may try waiting Trump out, in hopes Democrats use their coming control of Congress to somehow force him to surrender — but Dems surely won’t want to hand control of Hormuz, and a lasting stranglehold over world oil markets, to the "Death to America" crew.
Iran’s rulers need to give up their crazy demands, or their country will keep falling apart around them.
[Jpost] In an interview, Trump said Gulf states had urged him to delay further strikes on Iran, acknowledged the war's political cost, and discussed Obama and his plans for a Democratic-controlled Congress.
"We don’t need a deal with Iran. Those days have long since passed. We’ve got their money, Hundreds of Billions of Dollars, and we’ve got their Strait!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"I could end it immediately," he said.
"At the request of the nations that I’m looking to protect. We are doing it a little bit longer way, a little bit more civilly."
Trump then identified the countries that had asked him to exercise restraint.
"Saudi Arabia has asked me to please just let it be the way it is now for a while because they’re disintegrating," he said, referring to the Iranians.
"Qatar, if you look at that. Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain. All of them would rather, would much prefer the waiting period."
Trump acknowledged that he was not entirely convinced the delay was the right course.
"So they’ve asked me to do that and I’m doing that. I’m not sure I agree with it, but we’ve taken them largely out."
Asked whether he would already have intensified the military campaign if not for the requests from regional countries, Trump answered in the affirmative.
He also explicitly included Israel among the countries the United States was seeking to protect.
"Because the people that we’re looking to protect, and that includes Israel, the people that we’re looking to protect, which is basically the Middle East," he said.
However, unlike the Gulf states he specifically named, Trump did not say that Israel had requested a delay in further strikes.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/13/2026 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[118 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#3
I was playing with Copilot earlier this week and I kept asking it how to defeat Iran. The short version was that there are too many layers of IRGC leadership to force regime change externally and that any regime change would have come from within.
It also said that the absurd statements from various IRGC and senior politicians are for domestic consumption.
#4
The Iran war didnt hurt... Venezuela didnt hurt b/c they had a plan and executed it. Iran hurt b/c he floundered, it looks like there is no plan. I will bomb them with my ego until they art of the deal with me, that was a failed policy and that is what hurt.
By my count, there are less than 50 senior IRGC leadership positions:
10 core executive positions, the broader senior leadership includes 31 provincial corps commanders—one for each of Iran's 30 provinces, plus two separate corps commanders for Tehran Province.
It does seem like the military has the will to topple Iran like they did Venezuela.
#5
@4 Venezuela was simple, grab Maduro and bring him back to the US for trial.
Iran is a lot more complicated. I have no doubt that someone promised Trump and Hegseth that the aviators could force a regime change without ever needing boots on the ground. As so is often the case, the aviators exaggerated their abilities. The IRGC proved more resilient than expected with a deep bench of people to replace the ones we and Isreal killed. As a military air campaign, it was very well done. It probably would have worked on a western government. Politically it did not work on Arab Muslims who are willing and even eager to die fighting the "Great Satan'.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
... the Islamic version of the old Somali warlord...
