Foreign Affairs Can Trump Cut a Deal With Mexico? Declaring victory based on pre-inaugural posturing is, at best, premature. (Rebecca Noble/Getty Images) Negotiations between President-elect Trump and Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum heated up over the past week, with both presenting conflicting accounts of a recent diplomatic call. President-elect Trump launched his pre-inaugural diplomacy by threatening a 25 percent tariff on Mexican exports to the United States unless Mexican leadership implemented comprehensive border security measures. Initially, Mexico responded with combative rhetoric, threatening reciprocal tariffs and shifting blame for the trafficking crisis onto the United States. Negotiations were shaping up to be tense when, with habitual bombast, Trump announced that Sheinbaum had agreed to his undisclosed security demands and would be closing the international border to trafficking on Truth Social: Just had a wonderful conversation with the new President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo. She has agreed to stop Migration through Mexico, and into the United States, effectively closing our Southern Border. We also talked about what can be done to stop the massive drug inflow into the United States, and also, U.S. consumption of these drugs. It was a very productive conversation! Trump followed the update with an equally triumphant message, declaring, “Mexico will stop people from going to our Southern Border, effective immediately. THIS WILL GO A LONG WAY TOWARD STOPPING THE ILLEGAL INVASION OF THE USA. Thank you!!!” Announcing a vague security arrangement initially seemed to underscore the strength of American trade leverage over Mexico, but the hasty rollout and unspecified details likely betrayed a less settled understanding between the two leaders. Sheinbaum, who is maintaining a tough public posture, released a social media statement of her own the following day. The post dismissed Trump’s claims that Mexico would close the border, instead implying that Mexico already maintains adequate security and that no major change to the status quo has been implemented: In our conversation with President Trump, I outlined the comprehensive strategy that Mexico has implemented to address the migration phenomenon, respecting human rights. Thanks to this approach, we provide assistance to migrants and caravans before they reach the border. We reiterated that Mexico’s position is not to close borders but to build bridges between governments and peoples. Later asked by reporters to divulge details of her conversation with Trump, Sheinbaum emphasized that the phone call had been “excellent” but doubled down on her clarification that Mexico would not, in fact, shut down human and drug trafficking routes:  Each person has their own way of communicating. But I can assure you, I guarantee you, that we never—additionally, we would be incapable of doing so—proposed that we would close the border in the north [of Mexico], or in the south of the United States. It has never been our idea and, of course, we are not in agreement with that. At this stage, it’s difficult to ascertain what the future or U.S.–Mexico relations will be in the Trump-Sheinbaum era, though the last few weeks have given some indication of the nature of the developing relationship. Trump, as ever, is going to deal harshly with Mexico and publicize his wins with bombast. Trump’s demands for security are clear, as emphasized across a decade of campaigning and four years as president. His celebratory statements bolster his “promises made, promises kept” mantra while pressuring Mexican leadership to make public concessions.  Sheinbaum’s intentions are proving harder to decipher. Publicly, Sheinbaum has committed to tough rhetoric and the Morena Party’s concept of Mexican humanism. President-elect Trump’s reaction to their initial engagement suggests her private communications may be more pragmatic, or at least flattering. Mexico’s breakup of two small migrant caravans, which were referred to in Trump’s Truth posts, is a clue that the latter is likely.  Clarity as to the direction of bi-lateral relations will have to wait until policy implementation begins, set for the first day of the second Trump administration. Scant detail over any agreements or arrangements between the two leaders has been provided, limiting the value of pre-inaugural speculation. Trump’s victorious positing spurred celebration among online conservatives, each assured that the president-elect had cajoled his southern counterpart before even taking office. The right’s celebrations, which prematurely rewarded Mar-a-Lago without regard for specifics, serves to illustrate the benefits the respective presidents receive from domestic political signaling. Actionable solutions, justly demanded by an impatient American public, will come only after the politicking is done. The post Can Trump Cut a Deal With Mexico? appeared first on The American Conservative.

Foreign Affairs Tough Diplomacy, Not Invasion, Is the Way Forward With Iran Taking on the Islamic Republic militarily would be an enormous undertaking. Credit: KPG-Ivary Back in September, Israel successfully destroyed a bunker buried 60 feet underground, killing virtually all of Hezbollah’s senior leadership. Executing the operation involved about a dozen F-15s, each carrying six 2000-pound GBU-31v(3) joint direct attack munitions (JDAMs) bunker-buster bombs. First the residential high rises over the underground bunker were systematically destroyed. Then a brilliantly planned operation was executed, involving dropping dozens of bunker-busters in a precisely timed pattern that eventually blasted through 20 yards of soil and rock to destroy the bunker. Only a few militaries in the world could have executed such an intricate and complex operation. The point of the above description is not to praise Israeli military competence, but to show just how hard it is to destroy a bunker. This sheds concerning light on analysis by the Institute for Science and International Security that finds that two of Iran’s most important nuclear weapons facilities buried under at least 80 to 145 meters of rock (262 to 475 feet), with further protection from reinforced concrete that is very resistant to penetration and the ground shockwave produced by a bunker buster’s explosives. This makes taking them out problematic; the world’s most powerful conventional bunker buster, the United States’ 30,000-pound GBU-57 bunker buster can penetrate only about 40 meters of moderately hard rock. Still, multiple precision strikes by massive ordnance penetrators delivered by our B-2 stealth bombers could almost certainly severely damage or destroy Iran’s less deeply buried facilities. Even the more deeply buried facilities could be crippled by collapsing their main entrances, although such facilities almost certainly have backup entrances that would allow them to continue with some level of function. But even if our B-2s can evade Iran’s Russia-supplied anti-stealth radars and deliver enough GBU-57s to damage or destroy all the known facilities involved with nuclear weapons production and delivery, we still don’t really, truly know how much weapons-grade enriched uranium or plutonium—which can be quickly made into implosion-type fission bombs—the Islamic Republic has been able to acquire and hide away in secret locations. This all adds up to great uncertainty around the idea that simply applying American airpower can stop Iran from getting the bomb. If not airpower, then what? Well, there is always diplomacy. But given that Iran’s primary leader, the Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, is filled with ideological zeal and hostility towards the West, it is hard to imagine a deal in which Iran would give up having nuclear weapons in its back pocket as the ultimate deterrent to being held accountable for being the world’s number one sponsor of terror. This would seem to direct us to an unpleasant option—invasion and the defeat of Iran’s military, followed by scouring the country to remove every bit of equipment and material related to nuclear weapons production. Subsequent to the conquest, an agreement could be put in place that would set limits on Iran’s military, prohibit nuclear weapon development, mandate unrestricted inspection of nuclear power plants, and forbid the Iranian government from sponsoring terrorism under threat of immediate and overwhelming military force. This rosy scenario may sound great, but talking about invading a heavily armed country with a population of 91 million that encompasses 636,000 square miles is much, much easier than executing such an invasion. Some analysts believe it would take 1.6 million troops and countless thousands of casualties to defeat and occupy Iran. Others note that Iran is one of the world leaders in producing the kind of drones that have proven so deadly in Ukraine and that the country has both ballistic and cruise missiles that pose a much greater threat to U.S. warships than even those successfully used by the Houthis to date. One could look back at all the dire predictions of mass casualties that U.S. and coalition forces were predicted to incur prior to both Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Those never occurred, and it might be tempting to think that current dire predictions about taking on Iran are similarly flawed. Yet there are some important differences between today and the early 90s and early 2000s. First, our depleted, DEI-weakened military is not nearly so powerful as it was heading into those conflicts. Second, putting together a coalition like we had back then is highly unlikely. Third, Iran’s large military is more technically sophisticated than Iraq’s ever was. Fourth, because we are waging a dangerous proxy war with Russia that has been responsible for killing many thousands of Russia’s young men, it would be foolish not to expect Russia to lend its considerable expertise and massive defense industrial base to help Iran deal casualties to U.S. forces in return. And finally, most analysts agree that Iran could in short order cobble together a number of fission bombs that would have a good chance of working even as it is defending itself from invasion. This all adds up to making the invasion option a costly, unattractive and prohibitively risky option that a war-weary U.S. public will not support.  That brings us back to diplomacy and containment. While the chance to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power was fumbled by the Biden administration and may no longer be possible, it is still worth aggressively pursuing. And it is worth noting that the recently elected president of Iran, the cardiac surgeon and former health minister Masoud Pezeshkian, was the most moderate of the presidential candidates and has a history of advocating for more engagement with the West in order to obtain sanctions relief.  Consequently, starting on January 20 of next year, President Donald Trump will be able to leverage Pezeshkian’s desire to avoid looming sanctions. Another action Trump can take to put the United States into much better position, both military and diplomatically, is to follow through on his promise to quickly negotiate an end to the United States’ proxy war with Russia on terms that incentivize Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to once again to use his influence with Iran to help the U.S. curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The settlement must also make it more profitable for Russia to trade and cooperate with the West, as opposed to being forced by U.S. sanctions to more tightly align with countries like China, Iran and North Korea. In parallel to the above efforts, the Trump administration will of course be working to expand the Abraham Accords to other Arab nations to further isolate Iran. And finally, sometime in the not-too-distant future the elderly ayatollah will die, giving moderate Iranians an opportunity to decisively show they want to end the rule of anti-West radical Islamists and inaugurate a better, sanctions-free life for their children. The post Tough Diplomacy, Not Invasion, Is the Way Forward With Iran appeared first on The American Conservative.

UTL COMMENT:- Damage done - fuck them. Plus it wasn’t an apology. They only apologised for their comments.... In reference to my upload earlier today... https://old.bitchute.com/video/hfuANcsZ6ZQi/ UTL COMMENT:- NEVER VISIT THOSE PUBS OWNED BY 'AUSTRALIA VENUES' AGAIN!!! NOT JUST AUSTRALIA DAY - BOYCOTT THEM INDEFINITELY!! Go woke-----Go broke! ???Here's the list of pubs to avoid. https://www.ausvenueco.com.au/venue-portfolio/ I would also suggest contacting https://www.ausvenueco.com.au/contact/ and letting them know why you won't be patronising their woke venues anymore. #Boycott

This content is for members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.The post Star Wars: Skeleton Crew (season 1) first appeared on Worth it or Woke.

In the age of Amazon and other online retailers, delivery drivers have become an integral part of our lives. But most of us rarely interact with the people who drop packages at our door via UPS or FedEx or USPS, and if we do, it's usually only for a few seconds. We might manage a friendly "Good afternoon!" or quick "Thanks a bunch!" as they hustle to and from their vehicle, always rushing to fulfil their quota as efficiently as possible.Delivery folks work hard. They're on their feet much of the day, traipsing up hundreds of front walks a week, through all kinds of inclement weather. Yes, it's their job and they're paid to do it, but it's always nice to have your work seen and appreciated, which is one reason a video of UPS driver discovering a sweet treat on a customer's front porch is going viral.Another reason is that it's just hilariously adorable. A doorbell camera caught a UPS driver wearing a holiday bauble headband walking up to the door and dropping off a package as she talks to herself. After she takes a photo of the delivery, she sees that the customer had left a little tray of drinks and snacks, and her "Oooh, do I see honey bunny?" is a sign of the hilarity to come. Watch her reaction and the way she joyfully make her way back to the truck. from MadeMeSmile Unsurprisingly, people are in love with the driver and her giddy goofiness. "I literally laughed out loud at her crazy walk back to the truck. I need more people like her in my life.""I have a friend like that, he just makes my day every time we see each other. ?""That is way adorable! Simple act that makes the day of a random person "I don’t know anything else about her but she’s my new fave human.""OMG she reminds me of our mail carrier so much. We leave her cookies at Christmas and she always does a little happy dance that day."Delivery drivers and former delivery drivers shared that these kinds of gestures really do mean a lot. "As a former delivery driver, i want you to know that if you leave snacks and drinks out for us, we love you to the moon and back. ?""Driving for Amazon paid my rent for 10 months. Not exaggerating when I say that it was a dark time in my life. Snacks made me smile. every. single. time.""I mean... I literally took something from every house that had stuff out. I worked 10-12hrs+ during the holidays... I needed every calorie I could get walking 20-30miles a day.""Even when I didn't take them I appreciate them. it's like seeing a sign that says we love delivery drivers.""I'll tell you what, the people who leave food got me through my holidays as a postal carrier. Nothing slaps harder than an ice cold redbull and bag of pretzels and ice cold bottle of water that was left in a cooler. I had a lady who asked me what I liked and then had sperate bags labeled "Mail carrier USPS" and "UPS GUY" and "FED EX GUY" with our preferred snacks. She asked me what my favorite ice cream was and she knew my mile long loop and knew when I parked, I'd be done in 15mins, so, she'd be waiting at the truck every day all summer with an ice cream and a napkin.There are some people who just f---ing make the day feel worth it, if you are one of these people, you are what makes delivering mail worth it. We do notice the nice things you do for us, THANK YOU.""I do this during the summer. I'm in Texas so it's routinely over 100°F. I'm always trying to make sure there are cold drinks for our postal workers and delivery people.""I do it during Australian Christmas. 40c/100f plus on a December day. Coke water and Gatorade always gone by lunch."It's a good reminder that it doesn't take a lot to show appreciation and make someone's day. These kinds of positive interactions, even when asynchronous and not directly face-to-face, are an important part of building the kind of world we all want to live in.

Editor's Note: This story contains discussion and/or embedded images of domestic violence. If you or someone you know is experiencing domestic violence and need help call 1-800-799-SAFE or text “START” to 88788 to reach The National Domestic Violence Hotline.Dave Ramsey gained popularity in the early 90s after starting a radio show to help people with money questions. The show exploded and evolved along with its host. Now Ramsey hosts a show named after him where he continues to answer money questions from people who call and write into the show. On a more recent episode, a woman, Danielle, calls in to get financial advice on selling her home she shares with her partner and their shared child. But the reason she wanted to sell her home piqued Ramsey's interest causing him to go into concerned dad mode. Danielle is focuses in on being able to make $88K off of selling her home which would allow her to pay off her debt of $16K and settle in a new town with her son–without his father.Ramsey perks up as does his co-host, Rachel Cruze, as they take in what the woman is saying but the fear in Danielle's voice is palpable. Listeners can tell she's either sneaking to call or is afraid her partner will put together what is happening. There's an immense amount of tension in the studio but through the entire exchange Ramsey and Cruze remain a calming voice of reassurance and reason. now we're talking yes GIF by Ramsey Solutions Giphy "I don't know if you need to sell your house or not, you may, that's possible but that's not your problem today is it," Ramsey asks the woman before asking if she had family in the area. Much to Ramsey and Cruze's relief the frightened woman reveals she has a father, brothers, aunt and a grandmother in or near the city in which she lives. Ramsey immediately encourages the woman to contact her father and police to get her out of the dangerous living situation but Danielle refuses, even when Ramsey offers to call the police for her.The insistent refusal on contacting law enforcement or her family seemed to trigger Cruze into sussing out the true reason the woman didn't want to leave. Cruze asks the woman where her 8 month old son is which is when Danielle reveals her partner is holding the child standing directly in front of the car she's sitting in speaking to the co-hosts. This whole situation feels like the plot of a lifetime movie. love shouldn't hurt-printed on back of woman Photo by Sydney Sims on Unsplash While Danielle didn't mention if the boyfriend was physically abusive in the first part of the call, she did imply she was afraid of him. The mom of one also reveals that she has previously involved the police but it "didn't work." But given the audible fear in the woman's voice it's not a far leap for the two co-hosts and their listeners to believe the woman is being abused in some way that has made her fearful of her partner. "No, no, honey, we don't need to call a realtor. We need to get your boyfriend out of the house and that's gonna involve the police and or your father and your brothers. He needs to leave, it's your house...and you're afraid. You understand that this is wrong, right," Ramsey tells the woman. "You're not the crazy one. I'm talking to the sane one." @daveramsey “You need to call the police—you’re in danger” #domesticabuseawareness #relationshipproblems #moneytips #daveramsey @Rachel Cruze ♬ original sound - Dave Ramsey Immediately the woman begins to sob and briefly became frantic when Ramsey says one of the producers was going to call the police. After more talking to calm the woman she agrees she does need for the partner to leave the home. Ramsey offers to set up free counseling to the woman and to assist her with finances once she is safe, the call ends there.In an update video, Ramsey shares that Dr. John Delony, a fellow co-host walks by as they're speaking to the distressed mother. Delony not only has a PhD in counselor education and supervision but has certifications in National Association of Behavioral Intervention and Threat Assessment (NABITA) and Group Crisis Intervention, Individual Crisis Assistance, Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM). Delony took over the call off air, explaining in the update that things got a little sticky while talking to the woman. Planned Parenthood Relationship GIF by INTO ACTION Giphy "It was intense, mainly cause it was live. It was happening live and she was not...it wasn't philosophically unsafe, she was unsafe now, and somebody else had her kid. And then you've got this mom who needs to protect herself, but I'm not gonna leave my baby unprotected and now you've got a messy situation," Delony says before continuing. "Whenever I show up to something like that, I'm always looking at escalation trends. Is this thing slowing down are people separating are they just yelling at each other or is this thing moving up? And this one moved up real rapidly."Thankfully, the police show up quickly while Delony is still speaking with Danielle and take the man into custody. When the update was shared the woman was safe with her family and Delony connected her with domestic violence services in her local area. The entire Ramsey team was on high alert pulling together to ensure the woman's safety. What an amazing job by all involved. Best wishes for a bright future for Danielle and her son Charlie.