74 Comments
User's avatar
Jimm Roberts's avatar

Bill crafted today a superb assessment of a foolish decision by a ready-fire-aim draft dodger to wage war on behalf of Israel by attacking a country no threat to the US.

Stunning too to learn no one among his immediate advisors considered the possible consequences including to nearby Arab states much less to ships seeking to transit the Straits of Hormuz.

We have a certified idiot as our current president unrestrained by a pushover Congress.

Sierradenali's avatar

Everyone knew the possible consequences including the strait situation. The defense dept. has analyzed this for decades. Do you suppose know one mentioned it? Iran has been killing people for 50 years and this action has made it a lot more difficult for them to continue doing so.

Jimm Roberts's avatar

Suggest you study how the sad history of our post WW II relationship with Iran developed.

It would not be anywhere as contestable were it not for oil.

For reasons that elude me, the US took extreme umbrage in the 1950's when Iran expropriated US oil company projects in Iran but, years later, made no attempt to prevent the Saudi's from doing the same thing.

In any case, we have the wrong person at our helm of state

Sierradenali's avatar

I think this helmsman may be the only person who would have done it. If we had stuck to “diplomacy”, (highly paid aristocratic gentleman talking, talking, talking), Iran would have had a nuclear weapon. I like those crazy people without it.

Jimm Roberts's avatar

Iran will one day acquire nuclear weapons.

But they won't use them for the same reason all the nations that possess them won't use them either.

The restraint is called MAD.

Look it up.

You're not alone for being unaware of this restraint. Our "helmsman" is too.

If he was aware of it, then he would not have caused the incredible chaos and needless deaths in the last five weeks.

Nick Bruijn's avatar

MAD does not mean much to people who seek victory or martyrdom

Jimm Roberts's avatar

Yes; you're right.

But it's hard to believe 90 million Iranians want to instantaneously obliterate their ancient civilization because some fanatic followers of their current religion want all Iranians to become martyrs.

Sierradenali's avatar

Try not to be insulting. I know what MAD means. I don’t think the Iranians do. These people are religious fanatics and would surely go down in flames trying to take the rest of the world with it. Oh and if you don’t know what fanatic means,,,,,,

Jimm Roberts's avatar

Agree. Nothing stymies a conversation faster than a demeaning retort.

However, I disagree that the Iranians have a death wish.

Before Trump started killing them, their own government of religious fundamentals brutally suppressed a citizens revolt

The Iranian citizens were seeking to overthrow their religious leaders

They didn't succeed. Thousands died in the process. Soon after comes Trump killing more Iranians, citizens of a county never a threat to the US

Sierradenali's avatar

I think perhaps the Saudi situation had a lot to do with relationships involving the Bush family.

Lucas Kandia's avatar

Lol.

The "defense" department has analyzed this for decades.

Because, you know, the Strait of Hormuz is part of their "defense" plan. For you know, New Jersey.

Ellen's avatar

Just to clarify: my post about silly comments was referring to the two derogatory comments that had been posted before mine. I guess you’d have to look at time stamps to find them. I remain a Bill Bonner fan.

Lucas Kandia's avatar

You might do well to simply edit your original comment. Then you won't be idolized by those you deem foolish, and demonized by those who actually follow your logic.

Ellen's avatar

Thanks! I just did that.

working stiff's avatar

Chuckle Schumer would be very proud of You Billy, very proud indeed. Your little baby girl AOC too, and what a hypocrite Chuckie is. Good company Bill, very good.

Bob Wetmore's avatar

What an idiotic comment. You must be coming off a heroin high.

Tom Langdon's avatar

Wow Bob not sure I know what that feels like, do you.

Bart Nelson's avatar

Bill is clueless. One minute he is condemning the killing of couple thousand people in this conflict then he is mad that we haven't wiped all of them out by using the tactics of Genghis Khan. It is starting to get a little mental. We are in the driver's seat and have been since the beginning of this. Yes, gas prices are up, but if you are familiar with the US, if somebody farts in the wrong direction, it affects the consumer every time. It is the old just give me a reason, and I can get a reaction.

Maybe this little dwell is let those European (NATO) bastards feel the pain of turning their backs on us. Remember a couple of months ago they were calling Trump Daddy. It looks like Daddy is getting ready to spank some asses!

Anthony's avatar

Bart, your summary of Bill's thoughts is somewhat of a simpleton's caricture. The article isn't long. After rereading it, can you really not squeeze out a different, logically coherent meaning and conclusion? (Spoiler: "If you're gonna talk like Genghis and throw hands like Genghis...then have the conditioned wind like Genghis.")

Fraser M's avatar

Accusing NATO allies of deserting you misses what the US actually gets out of the deal.

Its naive to expect ghe benefits to be symmetrical. In exchange for providing security, the US gets global reach, military primacy, influence over standards, and a global system that largely runs on its terms.

That position reinforces everything else, from defence markets to the role of the dollar at the centre of the global economy.

That’s not being taken advantage of. That’s shaping the environment so you don’t have to fight on equal terms with current and former rivals.

And allies don’t stop acting in their own interests just because they’re on the same side. Take the Suez Crisis. Britain and France acted. The US stepped in, not to support them, but to stop them, because it didn’t suit American interests for old empires to reassert themselves.

Is that betrayal?

NATO works precisely because it tolerates that tension. And even when 2 NATO countries fight each other (Turkey and Greece) accommodations are made.

Like it or not, alliances aren’t built on fairness, they’re built on usefulness.

NATO has lasted because, on balance, it’s been useful to everyone involved.

Sierradenali's avatar

So Bill, what exactly did Obama and Biden get for $150-200 billion they “spent/gave”, to Iran and where were you then?

John P Gallien's avatar

Where he always is - with his head up his arse.

Sierradenali's avatar

I don’t know John, Bill’s a smart guy with a good grasp of history. I’m having a hard time understanding this Trump derangement thing he seems to have going on. It’s seems to be getting worse. He’s still interesting to read though and he’s got us talking about it.

John P Gallien's avatar

Well, Bonner is a smart guy, and many leftists are also smart. But that intelligence is wasted when it is based on a false foundation that doesn't comport with the basic facts of reality (as many leftists do). I am not impressed with Bonner's apparent knowledge of history as he constantly misapplies historical event to current events just to make a point in an effort to seem a lot smarter than he actually is - IMO. I believe, in his case, there is a certain amount of dishonesty in the examples he gives. And certainly, a disrespect for his readers as he actually believes that they will swallow, uncritically, anything he writes. So, in the last few months and going forward, I have kept my comments to a minimum, only engaging when I see some intelligent comments on this page. Unfortunately, many of the comments on this page are as unhinged as Bonner's column.

Anthony's avatar

Thomas Jefferson was a leftist? The Austrian School Of Thought / Mises Institute are leftist proselyte factories?

John P Gallien's avatar

Yeah... but what about James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Grover Cleveland, George Reisman, Mark Twain, and Alphonso Linguini?

Anthony's avatar

James Madison…loved by fiscal conservate Austrian Schoolers, was a Jeffersonian conservative. He opposed the cursed John Marshall, of Marbury v Madison fame.

Abraham Lincoln caused the beginning of the American Empire. Thomas DeLorenzo, another Mises Institute / fiscal conservative scholar (along with Bill Bonner), excoriates him in a series of well-footnoted books. I suggest you read them. Additionally, I personally recollect a Bill Bonner quote from around 2014 (?), in which he wrote in an Agora Financial article regarding the American Civil War, “the wrong side lost”.

The man is a consistent, deep-thinking, articulate writer. If you've not bothered to learn his underpinning theories, why do you bother to read him, much less bother to use vitriol in editorializing his comments?

Sierradenali's avatar

Well said, I agree but he has to do it every day and for that reason, I still respect his intellect, if not always his position. Thanks for the reply.

John P Gallien's avatar

But that's the thing - he doesn't have to do it every day. And I think his writing suffers from it - not the style, but the substance. But as you mentioned, I think a large part of his problem is his TDS. Without that, he might be more reasonable. If it was someone else as President, wouldn't you think Bonner might mention and approve of some of the policies Trump has enacted - like deregulation, investment in energy including nuclear, bringing back investment and manufacturing to the USA, drilling again and infrastructure for fossil fuels, trying to get rid of waste and fraud in government, not kowtowing to the global warming insanity, etc. You would think Bonner would be for all these things being supposedly a "free-market" guy. Why does he never mention any of it?

As I write this, another thought comes to mind. I believe Bonner is a globalist and doesn't see much difference between the USA and socialist Western Europe or even China, Russia, and Iran. All legitimate governments in his mind and no problem being entirely dependent on China for critical resources and products. His idea of free-market and free trade doesn't differentiate between trading with relatively free countries and trading with what are essentially dictatorships (or close to it) who would bury us if they could. I don't think Bonner deserves a "pass" anymore for what he writes. I've come to the point where I have mostly contempt for him built up over the last several years.

Sierradenali's avatar

You make a very compelling argument and I agree with you but I’ve been with him for many years and have benefited from his work, so I have to give him the benefit of the doubt a little while longer. Thanks for the thoughtful response .

Tom Langdon's avatar

Bill you talk as though this kinetic engagement is over and America has lost, and further, that American strategy is considered stupid. As usual you paint our enemy as wise and sagacious and with 5800 years of history to hone their duplicitous behavior, which is a major part of their culture. As you well know lying to support the ways of Islam is sanctioned and is an intrinsic part of the Iranian culture.

General Jack Keane has said that American firepower could easily secure the Strait of Hormuz, which incidentaly is in international waters once 12 mile off the coast of Iran. As evidence General Keane points out that America firepower has protected the 16 to 18 ships in and about the Strait throughout this engagement, none of which have been touched by Iranian firepower. In the same way American firepower could bubble the Strait with overwatch firepower. So Bill Trump has already only this kinetic engagement, the politics are just playing out as is the way of modern diplomacy.

Jimm Roberts's avatar

MAGA ex-post-facto blather to shroud a strategic blunder of epic proportions making life more costly for all worldwide.

Tom Langdon's avatar

Possible, but doubtful, let us both watch it work out and then compare notes?

Jimm Roberts's avatar

Since you are a serious commentator, I suggest you read a third party assessment of this president.

My take-away: He's not the man conservatives (like me) think he is.

See: https://heatherdelaneyreese.substack.com/p/the-president-can-be-bought?triedRedirect=true

Vern's avatar

excellent link. gratitude. I will now have to revert to calling him "The Don" as "the Orange Oaf" sounds too mealy mouthed

Vern's avatar

the fact that Trump called mail-in-voting Mail-in-cheating and voted by mail himself is just brilliant... lol x 100 !!!

Tom Langdon's avatar

Ok, I am not a serious commentator rather, I just enjoy the back and forth. But I will read you suggestion and get back to you tomorrow.

Harold Shaeffer's avatar

"International waters 12 miles off of coast". That fact didn't seem to register when the mighty US Armed Forces were blowing the "so called drug boats out of the Gulf of Mexico "International Waters". Crap like that starts making one to start rooting for the other side.

Also, please advise how the "12-mile rule" works on the 90 miles between US and Cuba?

Tom Langdon's avatar

Well as you well know it works best for those who have the most firepower. Now you may not like such, as many do not, but history has documented this kind of diplomacy time and time again. Moreover, it is consistent with the human condition with few exceptions.

Don Hrehirchek's avatar

Yep Tom , that human condition of the knowledge of good and evil. Just can not be put into proper perspective.

Mackinac's avatar

TDS unabated. Thank goodness I can skim this shit and don't have to understand the "logic" of hate produced by trad media.

John P Gallien's avatar

I actually formulated the first sentence of my reply before I scanned Bonner's column because I knew it would be another sh*t sandwich.

Frank Westmoreland's avatar

Mr. Gallien, So far, I think Pres. Trump has been handling this matter quite well. His military has sustained a tiny number of casualties, and he is sending the mullahs a strong message that they need to quit trying to build nuclear weapons and spreading terrorism around the world. If they continue either or both, then his military will return the following year and bomb them again (with minimal casualties), and again and again until they get the message.

The Pentagon employs millions of Americans to build planes, bombs, and weapons systems, so it’s not too difficult to replenish those used on troublemakers.

And it’s hilarious when Bill acts like the mullahs are going to rebuild their military infrastructure overnight. Even if leftist leaders in Western Europe (W.E.) are willing to pay tolls now for their ships to pass through the Strait so the mullahs can build back their military infrastructure, Pres. Trumps’s military can return and bomb the mullahs’ buildup. And because leftist W.E. leaders now depend on 90%-plus support from Muslims in their countries to have any chance of holding onto power, and these leaders have to pay tolls for energy, causing economic problems for their countries---fine. And hopefully, Pres. Trump will follow through and gradually defund NATO, further hurting these pro-jihadi W.E. leaders. And why should the U.S. put out a substantial effort to open the Strait so these pro-jihadi W.E. leaders benefit? Let the mullahs gouge these W.E. fools.

John P Gallien's avatar

Couldn't agree more. I'm not an expert on these foreign affairs with Western Europe, but it seems to me that if we want an alliance in that region, we should just have it with the countries that supported us in this action, the strongest of which have been Eastern European countries. Seems like we should disengage with countries like UK, Spain, Germany, France, and, I believe, Italy, and any others: not sure if I got it correct here, but whichever ones have not supported us should be gone from a new alliance. They are not reliable and as you state, have turned their countries over to a growing Muslim population which makes them even more unreliable. Most of them have swallowed the global warming garbage and have weakened themselves in terms of energy as they have rejected fossil fuels and nuclear for the unreliable piddle power of solar and wind. Seems like they have become a woke socialist pigsty. Although there is some opposition to this in some of the countries, so we have to be aware of the political dynamics going on in each country as a bad partner now may be a good partner down the road. Thankfully, Trump has come along and has seemingly reversed that trend in our country.

Eid's avatar

Tell the farmers with no fertilizer and sky high Diesel prices and gas prices over $4 dollars that the Strait is only benefiting others…consumer sentiment the lowest ever…

John P Gallien's avatar

Oh, I'll tell them. Can I tell them they won't have a nuclear bomb exploding around them too?

Ellen's avatar

What silly comments! “There are none so blind as those who will not see.” I am referring to derogatory comments that had been posted when I read the article, not to Bill Bonner’s analysis of events.

Tom Langdon's avatar

Not sure what you are saying but I think I like it.

Tom Langdon's avatar

Ok, I don't like it.

John P Gallien's avatar

Well, that's silly Billy for you!

Angry Icebergs's avatar

The Persian Empire was vast and complex, a melting pot of religions, cultures and civilizations: heritage in which people can find pride.

Persian's were Zoroastrian said to have influenced the faiths of Jews, Christians and Muslims.

-

Persia's down fall began around the 7th century as Islam took hold, persecuting the Persian non-followers.

-

Thereafter the focus shifted towards religious and political consolidation, which led to a decline in the scientific and economic progress that had characterized the Persian Empire.

The increasing emphasis on Iranian Islam, and Shi’i exceptionalism bred the new nation-state of Iran, alongside their terror proxies threatening non-Islamic civilizations.

FAFO

James ( Jim) Marshall's avatar

For those who "actually read" history, you would note, Genghis Khan was about "DOING", not talking.

Yes he killed millions on his conquest. In todays world those tactics wouldn't fly. This movie is far from the ending scenes. As the world wakes up to the fact that the straits are "international waters" and the price of oil keeps going up and the supply is going down, they will demand an end to the talking. The straits will then open and it won't be pretty.

Jim Marshall

Tom Langdon's avatar

Couldn't agree more

Lucas Kandia's avatar

That is the best commentary, on why not to hand a child a pair of scissors. Without thinking about the consequences first.

An Ol' LSO's avatar

That is awesome, Lucas, just awesome.

Allan R Camrud's avatar

Many people "threat" to stop reading the BPR as you have lost their trust... a crystal ball Bigman Billy is in the eye of the beholder and dare I say your version is arguably untrustworthy. Consider your friend Kamala, "building a future unburdened by the past". Billy your picture of the future and mine are similar in one sense, our days left to enjoy it our numbered...

John P Gallien's avatar

Bonner masterly crafts another sh*t sandwich for his readers.

And no, Bill, re your quote: "The civilization in question has been around approximately 5,800 years longer than the US. And it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere, any time soon." Not the same civilization. Just another example of your shallow thinking. Although maybe the mullahs who run IRAN think like those of 5,800 years ago.

STEVE SHIRLEY's avatar

Alas, the gnashing of teeth and ad hominems thrown from the deranged Trumpers brings me a smile of joy. The Big Man did secure the uranium, right?

Vern's avatar

no, and the double O doesn't know where it is either

John P Gallien's avatar

Keep smiling Steve. Bonner gets back what he dishes out.

RANDALL R NORTON's avatar

Soooo, Bill. Did you think the US should have just left Iran alone and let them repair and expand their nuclear strength? So Iran could have the US by the "short hairs" if they decided to cause all manner of damage and still control the Straits. They would be the "boss" and they would be happy to pound Europe, whom they could reach, as we've learned. Yeah, that would be much better right, since the US is "out of danger" - yeah, Europe can just hunker down and hope Iran would play nice - like you think they would've. Ask the Iranian civilians how nicely they, the civilians, are treated.

Egypt Solomon's avatar

Bill, haven’t you ever heard the song Bob Dylan wrote for Donald Trump back in 67?

You Ain’t Goin’ Nowhere

“Genghis Khan and his brother Don

Couldn't keep on keeping on

We'll climb that bridge after it's gone

After we're way past it” (Bob Dylan 1967)

Let me get this straight, the Don goes in loud, threatens extinction, breaks a bunch of stuff, and walks out having created a premium revenue stream for the other guy?

That’s not strategy, that’s a Kickstarter campaign for your opponent.

US: “Give us your compliance or face destruction!”

Iran: “We’ll take Door Number Three, and also your shipping lanes.”

And now they’re collecting tolls like it’s the world’s most dangerous turnpike, while Trump’s over there on Truth Social basically saying, “Big money! Tremendous!”

Yeah, not for you, genius.

You didn’t defeat them, you upgraded their business model. This is the first war where the losing side sends a thank-you card and a revenue forecast.

If you threaten to end a civilization,

and then the civilization doesn’t end,

and instead starts making more money, I don’t think that’s a win. I think that’s the opposite.

And now everybody’s paying more for gas. I guess the war was successful, if the goal was to make things more expensive. Which is a pretty achievable goal. I’ve done that just by going to the grocery store.