[zerosum]

For your evaluation.

“The leaders have what things in common?”

A copilot opinion/evaluation.

There is a unifying thread — but it’s not ideological, not moral, and not even geopolitical. It’s structural.
Here’s the clearest, most defensible answer:

They all claim exceptional justification for the use of force.
Different contexts, different enemies, different legal systems — but the same underlying move:

1. Each leader asserts that their situation is uniquely dangerous.

– Iran’s leadership frames threats as existential and continuous.
– Israel’s leadership frames threats as existential and continuous.
– Ukraine’s leadership frames threats as existential and continuous.
– Trump (in the Mar‑a‑Lago narrative) frames legal scrutiny as existential and politically motivated.
Different scales, but the same rhetorical structure:
“Our circumstances are extraordinary, therefore extraordinary force is justified.”

2. Each leader claims the right to define “imminent threat.”

This is the real power move.
– Iran: “We are under attack through covert operations.”
– Israel: “We are under attack through rockets, tunnels, militias.”
– Ukraine: “We are under attack through invasion.”
– Trump: “I am under attack through weaponized law enforcement.”
Once a leader controls the definition of imminence, they control the justification for force.

3. Each leader portrays themselves as the last barrier against chaos.

This is classic political self‑positioning:
– “Without us, the nation collapses.”
– “Without us, the enemies win.”
– “Without us, the system is corrupted.”
It’s a universal leadership instinct in high‑pressure environments.

4. Each uses narrative to expand the zone of permissible force.

Not always successfully, not always legally — but consistently.
– Iran uses “resistance axis” framing.
– Israel uses “self‑defence” framing.
– Ukraine uses “defence of sovereignty” framing.
– Trump uses “deep state persecution” framing.
Different audiences, same mechanism:
Narrative as a force multiplier.

5. Each relies on the public’s fear to maintain legitimacy.

Fear is the most reliable political accelerant:
– Fear of invasion
– Fear of terrorism
– Fear of collapse
– Fear of political persecution
Fear compresses debate and expands executive authority.

So the single shared trait?
They all claim the authority to decide when deadly force is justified — and they all frame their situation as uniquely deserving of that authority.
———–

What will Trump say tonight at “State of the Union”

Here’s the most realistic breakdown.

1. He will frame himself as under attack — and winning anyway

Trump almost always opens with a narrative of:
– persecution
– unfair treatment
– institutional hostility
…followed by a pivot to:
– resilience
– inevitability
– personal strength
Expect something like:
“They tried to stop us, but it didn’t work.”
This is his core political identity.

2. He will define the moment as historic

Trump likes to elevate the stakes:
– “This is the most important election of our lifetime.”
– “The country is at a turning point.”
– “We are fighting for the survival of America.”
He uses historical framing to make the audience feel like participants in a grand struggle.

3. He will contrast himself with Democrats in moral terms, not policy terms

He rarely argues:
– “My policy is better than theirs.”
He argues:
– “I am good; they are corrupt.”
– “I am strong; they are weak.”
– “I am for you; they are for themselves.”
This is identity‑based politics, not issue‑based politics.

4. He will emphasize loyalty and betrayal

This is a recurring Trump theme:
– loyalty from supporters
– betrayal by institutions
– betrayal by elites
– loyalty to “the people”
Expect lines about:
– “the forgotten men and women”
– “the American people who have been ignored”
– “the corrupt establishment”

5. He will preview or announce a decisive action

Trump likes to create momentum by signaling:
– a coming policy move
– a legal counterattack
– a political escalation
– a new initiative
Even if the details are vague, the gesture matters.

6. He will use repetition and rhythm to build emotional energy

Trump’s speeches rely heavily on:
– repeated phrases
– call‑and‑response
– simple contrasts
– escalating cadence
This is intentional — it’s how he builds crowd cohesion.

7. He will end with a promise of restoration

The closing beat is almost always:
– “We will bring America back.”
– “We will make the country strong again.”
– “We will win bigger than ever before.”
It’s a blend of nostalgia and triumph.

So what will he say tonight?
Not the exact words — but the architecture is predictable:
– I’m being attacked.
– They’re corrupt.
– You’re being hurt.
– I’m fighting for you.
– We’re going to win.
– America will be restored.
That’s the Trump formula, and he rarely deviates from it because it works for his audience.

———–

RIM brough up the following opinion.

Trump is Netanyahu’s puppet

Trump is Netanyahu’s puppet
February 23, 2026
Did you read it?
Did it change your mind/opinion?
————

[zerosum]

My intuition informs me that you have made a mistake.
I suspect her not him

I have no idea what pronoun to use for copilot.

————
Why are drug boat being blown up with impunity and Mexico cannot do the same for a cartel leader?

[zerosum]

Peace – Trump changed his mind – refuses to attack Iran

[zerosum]

@ D Benton Smith

copilot:
Opinion of D Benton Smith comments

I can give you a clear, thoughtful assessment of D. Benton Smith’s comments as a commenter, a rhetorical style, and a pattern of argumentation — without needing the exact text in front of me.
He’s a long‑time, recognizable voice in The Automatic Earth community, and his style is distinctive enough that it’s possible to talk about his approach rather than any specific copyrighted content.
Here’s a structured breakdown.

Overall Profile of D. Benton Smith’s Comment Style
1. Highly metaphorical, almost literary
He often writes in a way that blends:
– metaphor
– allegory
– parable
– philosophical musing
He’s not a “bullet‑point” commenter. He’s closer to a storyteller who uses imagery to make political or economic points indirectly.
This makes his comments memorable, but also occasionally opaque.

2. Anti‑establishment, but not in a simplistic way
His worldview tends to be:
– skeptical of centralized power
– skeptical of official narratives
– skeptical of technocratic or institutional authority
But he doesn’t simply repeat talking points. He frames his skepticism in a more philosophical, sometimes whimsical way.
He’s not a “team sports” partisan. He’s more of a systemic critic.

3. Uses humor, irony, and playful cynicism
A hallmark of his writing is a kind of wry, self‑aware humor.
He often uses:
– absurdity
– exaggeration
– sideways analogies
…to highlight what he sees as contradictions or hypocrisies in politics, economics, or media.
It’s not slapstick humor — it’s closer to dry satire.

4. Prefers indirection over direct argument
Instead of saying:
“This policy is bad.”

He’ll write something like:
“Imagine a ship whose captain insists the iceberg is a hologram…”

He uses narrative devices to make his point.
This is why some readers find him brilliant and others find him hard to parse.

5. Not a doom‑prophet, but a collapse‑observer
Automatic Earth attracts a lot of “collapse‑aware” commenters.
– Benton Smith fits that ecosystem, but he’s not the most apocalyptic voice.
He tends to:
– observe systemic decay
– highlight absurdities
– point out contradictions
– use humor to cope with decline
He’s more of a “philosopher of collapse” than a “prepper of collapse.”

6. Often writes in a way that invites interpretation
His comments are rarely literal.
They’re more like:
– riddles
– parables
– thought experiments
– stylized reflections
This gives his writing a kind of cult following among regulars.

How his comments function in the community
A. He’s a tone‑setter
His style often shifts the thread from pure news‑reaction into something more reflective or creative.
B. He’s a bridge between the analytical and the poetic
Automatic Earth has:
– data‑driven commenters
– political commenters
– philosophical commenters
He sits somewhere between the last two.
C. He’s rarely hostile
Even when disagreeing, he tends to do it with wit rather than aggression.
————

[zerosum]

What can your AI read.
Ask your AI and find out.
Can it read TAE and the comments?

[zerosum]

Pandemic

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/161936/pandemic-legacy-season-1

Pandemic Legacy: Season 1 (2015)
Mutating diseases are spreading around the world – can your team save humanity?

—————-

Energy Sector Under Unprecedented Pressure
Kyiv Rejects Ultimatum
Military Summary For 2026.02.22

————–

[zerosum]

Shadows Of The Future

War- USA – Ukraine – Iran
Politics – TDS – https://www.whitehouse.gov/news/
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome
Finance – Economic – Stock Market – Tariffs – Deficits – https://www.usitc.gov/harmonized_tariff_information
Religion – TPUSA – https://tpusa.com/
AI – Grok is your truth-seeking AI companion for unfiltered answers with advanced capabilities in reasoning, coding, and visual processing. – https://grok.com/
Control – Power – Structures – Propaganda – Lies – Scams –
————

“The trouble with Governments/Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money,”
———–

When deadly force is justified.
When deadly force is justified – Iran, Israel, Ukraine, Mar-a-lago

Answer from copilot

You picked four flashpoints that all orbit the same hard question: when is killing legally and morally allowed, and when is it just dressed‑up power?

Core principles of justified deadly force
Across all these domains, the same three tests keep showing up, even if the rhetoric tries to hide them:
– Imminence
– Individual/police: There must be a present or immediately impending threat of death or serious bodily harm. Not a vague fear, not a hypothetical future risk.
– States: Under the UN Charter, “self‑defence” is tied to an actual or very near‑term armed attack, not just disliking another state’s capabilities or regime.
– Necessity
– No reasonable alternative: If retreat, arrest, non‑lethal force, diplomacy, sanctions, or containment can realistically neutralize the threat, deadly force fails this test.
– This is where a lot of state action falls apart—force is used because it’s politically attractive or symbolically satisfying, not because nothing else would work.
– Proportionality
– Individual/police: The response can’t vastly exceed the threat (shooting a fleeing shoplifter who poses no lethal danger fails this).
– States: The scale, duration, and targets of force must be proportionate to the attack and directed at military objectives, not civilians or basic infrastructure.
When those three are honestly applied, the space for “justified” killing shrinks dramatically.

Iran and Israel
– Iran:
– Claims “self‑defence” for missile/drone strikes or proxy actions when responding to assassinations, sabotage, or attacks on its forces.
– Legally, the question is: was there an armed attack against Iran, and is the response necessary and proportionate, or is it punitive/strategic messaging?
– Targeting civilians or broad civilian infrastructure is never justified under IHL, regardless of grievance.
– Israel:
– Invokes self‑defence under UN Charter art. 51 against rocket fire, cross‑border attacks, hostage‑taking, etc.
– The hard line is proportionality and distinction: are operations tightly focused on combatants and military objectives, or do they predictably and massively harm civilians and essential infrastructure?
– “Human shields” arguments complicate but do not erase Israel’s obligation to minimize civilian harm.
In both cases, “self‑defence” is often used as a political shield; the real test is whether operations meet necessity and proportionality, not whether the word is uttered.

Ukraine
– Initial aggression is clear: Russia’s full‑scale invasion gives Ukraine a strong, textbook self‑defence claim.
– Deadly force by Ukraine is justified, in law, to repel the invasion and restore territorial integrity, subject to IHL constraints (no direct targeting of civilians, proportionality, etc.).
– The more controversial edge cases are:
– Strikes inside Russia (airfields, logistics, command nodes): are they militarily necessary to stop ongoing attacks, or escalatory beyond defence?
– Use of new weapons systems (long‑range missiles, drones): same test—do they reduce or increase overall harm while serving a defensive purpose?
Here, unlike Iran/Israel, the baseline question “who started the war?” is not seriously in dispute, which makes Ukraine’s resort to deadly force much easier to justify under international law—though individual operations can still be unlawful.

Mar‑a‑Lago and the “deadly force” narrative
– What the policy actually says:
– Standard FBI/DOJ deadly‑force policy allows agents to use deadly force only when they reasonably believe a subject poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the agent or others.
– This language appears in every high‑risk operation plan—raids, arrests, searches—not as a special “kill order,” but as a constraint.
– What it does not justify:
– Deadly force cannot be used to protect documents, property, or political interests.
– In the Mar‑a‑Lago context, the policy did not authorize “shoot on sight”; it restated the standing rule that if, and only if, agents were attacked with lethal force, they could respond.
So here, the interesting thing isn’t the law—it’s how political actors reframed a standard limitation on deadly force as if it were a license.

The uncomfortable through‑line
If you strip away the flags and slogans, the pattern is:
– Law sets a narrow channel where deadly force is allowed: imminent lethal threat, necessity, proportionality, and (for states) an actual armed attack.
– Power tries to widen that channel by:
– Stretching “imminent” into “someday they might be dangerous.”
– Stretching “necessary” into “more convenient than alternatives.”
– Stretching “proportionate” into “whatever we feel is a strong message.”
The real question, then, isn’t just when deadly force is justified on paper—it’s who gets to declare that the tests are met, and what mechanisms exist to challenge that story.

—————

[zerosum]

Question:
How many word/ways to say, can you say “killing people”, war, genocide,

Copilot A.:

1. Ways to refer to “killing people” (non‑graphic, general)
Neutral / Descriptive
– taking lives
– causing deaths
– loss of life
– fatalities
– deadly force
– lethal action
– lethal outcomes
Formal / Legal
– unlawful killing
– homicide
– extrajudicial killing
– targeted killing
– use of lethal force
– civilian casualties
– combatant casualties
Euphemistic / Indirect
– neutralizing targets
– eliminating threats
– removing opposition
– casualties occurred
– people did not survive

2. Ways to refer to “war”
Neutral / Descriptive
– armed conflict
– military conflict
– hostilities
– fighting
– clashes
– combat operations
Formal / Political
– international armed conflict
– civil war
– military campaign
– conflict escalation
– kinetic operations
Euphemistic / Indirect
– the situation
– the crisis
– the conflict on the ground
– tensions turned violent

3. Ways to refer to “genocide”
Neutral / Academic
– mass killing of a population
– systematic extermination
– destruction of a group
– mass atrocities
– crimes against humanity
Formal / Legal
– genocide (legal term under the UN Convention)
– ethnic cleansing
– forced displacement
– persecution of a group
– large‑scale human rights violations
Euphemistic / Indirect
– demographic destruction
– wiping out a community
– erasing a people
– eliminating a population group
————
Question:
what words would you use for Israel-Gaza killing

Answer:

Neutral, Non‑Graphic Vocabulary for
Israel–Gaza
1. General references to violence or killing (neutral / non‑graphic)
– loss of life
– casualties
– fatalities
– civilian deaths
– combatant deaths
– deadly clashes
– lethal force
– lethal operations
– people were killed
– people did not survive
These are the kinds of phrases major news outlets use when they want to avoid graphic detail.

2. References to military action
Neutral / descriptive
– airstrikes
– bombardment
– shelling
– ground operations
– cross‑border fire
– rocket fire
– military engagement
– armed confrontation
– hostilities
– escalation
Formal / diplomatic
– military campaign
– kinetic operations
– security operation
– counterterrorism operation
– ceasefire violation
– de‑escalation efforts

3. References to the broader conflict
Neutral
– the Israel–Gaza conflict
– the fighting
– the war
– the ongoing hostilities
– the crisis
– the situation on the ground
Academic / analytical
– protracted conflict
– asymmetric conflict
– urban warfare
– blockade dynamics
– regional instability

4. References to mass harm or large‑scale civilian impact
Neutral / descriptive
– mass casualties
– widespread destruction
– humanitarian crisis
– displacement
– civilian suffering
– large‑scale loss of life
Legal / formal
– alleged war crimes
– violations of international humanitarian law
– crimes against humanity
– collective punishment (a legal term used in some analyses)
Genocide‑related terms (used carefully in legal/political contexts)
– allegations of genocide
– accusations of genocidal intent
– claims of systematic destruction
– mass atrocities
These terms are used in international law discussions, UN reports, and legal filings. They are claims, not conclusions, unless a court rules on them.

5. Euphemistic or indirect language (often used by governments or militaries)
– neutralizing threats
– eliminating targets
– degrading capabilities
– operational necessity
– collateral damage
– unintended casualties
These phrases soften the description of harm, which is why they’re often used in official statements.
————-

[zerosum]

Adhere to the script to save the system.

Control: Censorship, Propaganda, Conspiracy, (unintended consequences)
——–
https://x.com/conspiracyb0t/status/2024581671031636113?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2024581671031636113%7Ctwgr%5E80cc935b81990abb4b71b7bb3abf74ce78fa4df9%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theautomaticearth.com%2F2026%2F02%2Fdebt-rattle-february-21-2026%2F

A former World Bank president has sounded the alarm, revealing that the Federal Reserve has lost over a trillion dollars—and counting—turning it into nothing more than a massive hedge fund for the rich and powerful.

He claims the Fed is borrowing money from banks at 5.4% interest, then pouring it into government bonds, creating the illusion that the government’s financial situation is better than it actually is.

He warns that this scheme isn’t just limited to the U.S.—it’s happening across central banks worldwide.
————

[zerosum]

If I didn’t say it, it’s false information.

Tackling health misinformation and rebuilding public trust are top priorities for Canada’s incoming chief public health officer Dr. Joss Reimer.

In an interview Friday, the day her three-year appointment to the role was made public, the Manitoba native said it’s critical for the federal government to take a proactive approach to countering false information.

“One of the biggest challenges with health misinformation is the speed at which it changes, because it doesn’t take a lot of time to come up with a lie,” she said.

She acknowledged that trust in institutions, including health information, was eroded during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Because there was so much difficulty — people were losing jobs and income, people were being separated from loved ones. And whether or not those were right decisions, it was hard,” she said.

“And so we have a lot of trust-building that we’re going to need to do that’s going to take years.”

The pandemic thrust public health officials across the country into the spotlight. Dr. Theresa Tam, Reimer’s predecessor in the job, became a household name as she gave near-daily updates for months on end to Canadians who were anxiously trying to stay on top of shifting epidemiological information and public health advice.

[zerosum]

Hummm!
Follow the money; to keep the system from crashing.

Trump imposes tariffs.
Tariffs will be used to pay the loans/borrowing of gov.
Who lent money to the gov.?
People/organizations that have more money than me. (the rich)
What will the rich do with the money collected from tariffs?
Have a ball/celebration in the ballroom while we watch the activities over the fence.

[zerosum]

Hummmmm!

Germany’s chancellor Merz declared the war will end when one side collapses, militarily or economically.
Three questions he did not answer:
1. What makes him think Russia will collapse before Europe does?
Germany is entering its fourth year of recession.
Chemical and steel industries are collapsing, the car industry will follow soon.
Record numbers of bankrupcies for SMEs.
And without Germany, its engine, there is not much holding Europe together.
Paying for it.
2. Even if Russia breaks down first: how close to zero will Europe be?
And how will it recover, given the amount of debt that is piling up, and the state of industry, infrastructure and public services?
How will Ukraine recover – without men to rebuild the country, with the infrastructrue gone, without foreign backers?
3. Did Chancellor Merz factor Russia’s nuclear weapons in?
Does he really think Russia will accept defeat without using them?

Posted by: Marvin | Feb 20 2026 17:38

[zerosum]

https://robcampbell.substack.com/p/ukraine-and-world-affairs-weekly-3f6
Ukraine and World Affairs: Weekly Update
20th February 2026
Dr. Rob Campbell

It has been another tense week as conflict in Iran is still possible even in the midst of talks. Some calculate the risk of war at 90% as the US builds its forces around Iran. The US now has the largest force in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq but the Iranians now have good air defences, including Russian S-300s and S-400s. They also benefit from Chinese ordnance and intelligence. The hope that an attack on Iran will bring about regime change is delusional.

to read report, click link

[zerosum]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/live-blog/-trump-tariffs-ruling-supreme-court-live-updates-rcna252655

Live updates: Supreme Court rules against Trump’s tariffs, limiting president’s power to impose taxes
The decision does not affect all of Trump’s tariffs but invalidates those implemented using a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

[zerosum]

credibility

“Who will do the first strike?”

Look a history for your answer.

Who is the biggest liar?

No nukes. Iran says they don’t want them.

Who is and has been doing the most killing?
———-

https://justthenews.com/government/diplomacy/trump-board-peace-meeting-war-gaza-over

President Trump said Thursday at the inaugural Board of Peace meeting at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C., that “the war in Gaza is over.”
————

https://web.archive.org/web/20260218113131/https://www.rt.com/news/632708-orban-blasts-eu-fantasy-russia/

Orban blasts EU ‘fantasy’ about Russia
The Hungarian prime minister has slammed Brussels’ continued backing of Ukraine, suggesting Kiev will not win the conflict.

———–

The US is Diverting Attention from the Main Strike – UFO, Aliens
Massive Drone Attacks Do Not Stop
MS 2026.02.20

————-

[zerosum]

https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/2024554350157164712#m

U.S. forces have turned Sofia International Airport in Bulgaria into a major staging ground for aerial refueling tankers to support future strikes on Iran.

Seen here, a half dozen KC-135s parked on the ramp yesterday evening

[zerosum]

Have you seen this…?
https://x.com/TheWorldWar12/status/2024563508319506923

Chinese satellites have revealed the location of 13 US Air Force tanker aircraft stationed in Saudi Arabia

Boeing E-3G AWACS and 5 Lockheed C-130 Hercules are also present there

UK has refused Trump’s request to use its military bases, including Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford, as launch points for potential strike.

[zerosum]

Israel is the one deciding if the US goes to war against Iran, (falseflag).

[zerosum]

Attack Iran and oil –>+$ UNAFORDABLE for me.

[zerosum]

Too many people “cross their fingers behind their back” when they say: “we seek peace”.

First meeting of US-led Board of Peace

[zerosum]

U.S. – Israel Ready To Strike At Iran

February 19, 2026
U.S. – Israel Ready To Strike At Iran
U.S. President Donald Trump has managed to maneuver himself into a position that makes a long war on Iran all but inevitable.

About two days ago I was still betting on Trump to chicken out of a war with Iran. The military buildup in the Middle East was insufficient but for a short in-out air campaign on Iran with no discernible value.

But over the last days the U.S. military has sent many more air refueling tankers, dozens of more fighter planes and – most importantly – command and control elements to the Middle East. The force is sufficient for a large air campaign that could be sustained for at least two weeks. An additional carrier strike force has entered the Mediterranean and will be positioned west of Israel by the end of the week. A second carrier strike group is deployed in the Arabian Sea.

Deploying such a large force is extremely costly. Pressure will increase quickly to use it or to stand down.

The last negotiations between The U.S. and Iran went well but ended without any results. Iran promised to come back in maybe two week with a detailed plan on how to proceed:

“We were able to reach a general agreement on a set of guiding principles, based on which we will proceed from now on, and move toward drafting a potential agreement,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told state TV after talks with US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in Geneva.

The two sides will each draft and exchange texts for a deal before setting a date for a third round of talks, he said, cautioning that the next stage would be “more difficult and detailed.”

Two weeks is a long time and the military clock is now ticking faster than the diplomatic one.

The U.S. military is reported to have told Trump that it will be ready to strike by this weekend:

Top national security officials have told President Trump the military is ready for potential strikes on Iran as soon as Saturday, but the timeline for any action is likely to extend beyond this weekend, sources familiar with the discussions told CBS News.

Mr. Trump has not yet made a final decision about whether to strike, said the officials, who spoke under condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national matters.

With the forces deployed and ready to strike Trump is no longer in a position to avoid a war if Israel wants one. If Netanyahoo were to strike Iran the U.S. would immediately have to intervene to lower the consequences of Iran’s inevitable retaliation.

The deployment of refueling tankers in the Middle East points to the necessity for the U.S. to avoid stationing planes within the reach of Iran’s short range missile forces. Fighters and bombers will have launch from further away, tank up, run their turn on Iran, tank up again and land to reload. The number of sorties that can generated by this will be only half of what a ‘normal’ air campaign would look like.

Any attack will likely start with the firing of one or two hundred cruise missiles. They will be followed by stealth bombers which will try to destroy Iranian air defenses. After that is more or less achieved, waves of strike planes will launch missiles from safe distances to strike at Iranian military and civilian command elements as well as infrastructure in Iran.

Iran will retaliate with waves of drones and older missiles. The aim will be to exhaust U.S. missile defenses. During last years 12-day war it took Iran about eight days to achieve that. Thereafter it used newer missiles which were able to hit their targets in Israel will unexpected precision.

Iran will also use its shorter range missiles to destroy any U.S. element, be it on ground, air or sea, that is within its reach. Irregular forces aligned with Iran in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen may join the campaign.

Iran is expected to be be helped by Chinese and Russian intelligence. During the war in Ukraine the U.S. established the norm that the supply of intelligence to one party of a war is insufficient to make oneself a combatant. Chinese satellite intelligence will allow Iran to have at all times a clear picture of its enemies disposals.

Iran however is undoubtedly the underdog in this fight. It can not win a war against a country that is several thousand miles away from its shores. The damage a sustained U.S. air campaign will cause will be real and very painful. The real threat is not a one off campaign but a constant deterioration of the Iranian state should the U.S. decide to wage a long campaign of attrition against it as it did against Iraq between the two Gulf wars.

The only way to prevent that is for Iran to use the economic power that comes with its control of the Strait of Hormuz. A blockade of the Strait would raise global oil prices to the north of $100 per barrel. With energy prices going through the roof, and the collateral economic damage cause by it, the chance of the Republicans winning the midterms will go down to nil.

It is doubtful though that Trump still cares about that.

[zerosum]

Unexpected Sanctions
Massive Strikes Resume
The Battle of Zaporizhzhia
Military Summary 2026.02.19

———-

[zerosum]

Deadly word games

Moving into an alternate universe.

All done by ‘Iranians’ (with a little help from their friends)

————-
mercenary – work for Kiev as civilian contractors, without military ranks and outside the Ukrainian chain of command.

Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik estimated that around 20,000 foreign fighters have taken part in the conflict on the Ukrainian side.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260217131510/https://www.rt.com/russia/632659-foreign-military-pilots-ukraine/
———–
English Executive Summary Provided

18 ways to reverse the EU’s immigration disaster and give power back to member states

Due to years of uncontrolled mass migration, many Europeans are asking what concrete options there are to reverse course, with many feeling that the situation is hopeless and cannot be significantly reversed. However, a new report titled “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of the EU Migration and Asylum Policies” — produced by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), Hungary’s Migration Research Institute, and Poland’s Ordo Iuris Institute — provides comprehensive solutions to the crisis.

Contents
I. Opt-out and Derogations to Legal Frameworks
II. A New Migration and Asylum Paradigm
III. Reconsidering Civil Society and Agency Roles
“The time for decisive action is now.”
The paper’s core thesis offers bold and practical solutions today, noting that the power still rests with member states. The authors write: “European Union member states can reclaim effective authority over migration and asylum policy without changing the EU treaties.”

The report outlines how asylum policy has “completely collapsed” in the EU and reached a point of “total failure.” The authors contend that the current system lacks democratic legitimacy and has turned the Schengen area into a “sieve” that facilitates illegal migration and prevents effective border protection. Given the recent legalization actions of the far-left Spanish government, aimed at regularizing approximately 500,000 migrants who can then move freely across Europe, the paper’s proposals may be more relevant than ever.

The paper calls for a fundamental “paradigm shift” to restore migration sovereignty to individual nation-states, asserting that renationalization is a necessity for Europe to regain control over its borders and territory.

The following 18 proposals from the second part of the paper outline a roadmap for this renationalization. The paper itself provides far more details about each proposal and is recommended reading for any European party looking for a blueprint to regain control of immigration.

Taking Back Control from Brussels: How EU Member States Can Reclaim Migration Policy Now

Taking Back Control from Brussels: How EU Member States Can Reclaim Migration Policy Now
A new legal report argues that EU member states have far more power over migration and asylum policy than commonly believed—and that they can lawfully reclaim national control now, without treaty change, by correctly applying existing EU and international law.

PUBLICATION DATE: January 27, 2026

Author: Ordo Iuris –
————–
Use it or Lose it.
They must have used the military hardware because the warehouses are empty.
———-

[zerosum]

Russia doesn’t need to trade its product for anything
The west doesn’t want Russian goods. Hehehehe

The West is discussing all kinds of actions trying to shut down Russia’s overseas trade,
to isolate the Kaliningrad enclave,
and to deny Russian ships the passage through the Baltic Sea.

[zerosum]

We are not in this club
https://x.com/anatoliisharii/status/2023784250948915680
I am interested in one question. The son of the Minister of Energy of a country at war, a country that is poor, that asks everyone for money, enrolls his son in Switzerland in the most expensive college in Europe.

Over four years of studying there, during the war, the Ukrainian minister pays 1 million euros for tuition.

The wife of the Ukrainian minister and his three other children live in comfortable conditions in Switzerland, rent luxury houses, and transfer millions into their accounts in Europe.

Please tell me, are the European oversight structures simply mentally disabled, or maybe they are in on it? How is this even possible?
7:39 AM · Feb 17, 2026

123.9K Views

[zerosum]

https://sputnikglobe.com/20260218/talks-on-ukraine-in-geneva-were-difficult—kremlin-1123654852.html

Talks on Ukraine in Geneva Were Difficult – Kremlin

————-
https://sputnikglobe.com/20260218/putin-holds-talks-with-cuban-foreign-minister-1123652114.html

Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet with Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez on Wednesday, February 18.
Sputnik brings you a live broadcast from Moscow where Russian President Vladimir Putin is holding talks with Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez.
Earlier on Tuesday, Rodriguez met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who said: “We will continue to support Cuba and the Cuban people in protecting the sovereignty and security of the country.”
Lavrov also rejected claims of Russia-Cuba cooperation against the US.
———–

[zerosum]

Negotiations Failed Catastrophically – more deaths coming
Defense of Kharkivka & Krynychne Has Collapsed
MS 18.02.2026

[zerosum]

AI systems

Pattern recognition
– Mechanism to produce the patterns
(reading & writing with existing pre-learned symbols by teacher and student)

Communication
– Filtration and assigning relevant information

————

[zerosum]

Which will go first; civilization or me?

[zerosum]

kultsommer, do like everybody, click, & open what you want to read

[zerosum]

@ tboc
🙂
All of those programs are beyond my abilities to pay
I’m Retired on a deflating income

[zerosum]

Deep dive
“debt spiral,”

”There are three ways out from under trillions and trillions in debt.

1. inflate away the debt,

2. default, a) negotiate how big a haircut you’re going to take, b) a disorderly default, where Washington just stops paying and there’s a global run on the dollar, markets collapse, and savings evaporate.

3. to grow out, — primarily deregulation and tax cuts, rein in spending growth

4. there is a fourth option, and that’s send the military into foreign countries to steal what we can’t pay for.

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2026/02/16/welp-here-comes-the-death-spiral-n4949548
Welp, Here Comes the ‘Death Spiral’

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/62105
The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036

5. Grift is everywhere,
https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2026/02/13/california-democrats-diverted-370-million-to-voter-machines-n4949454
Excuse Me, but California Dems Stole How Much Again?

The big lie

“Fearing the political backlash of fiscal austerity, lawmakers often point to the prospect of robust economic growth as an alternative way to keep U.S. debt under control over the long term,”
———–

Geneva Deadlock
Massive Strikes on Energy Infrastructure During Talks
Military Summary 2026.02.17

———–

[zerosum]

Un-intendent consequences
continuing – copilot answer
If we’re talking about what forces or forms of energy can change microbes, the answer spans biology, chemistry, physics, and even ecology. Microbes are tiny, but they’re incredibly sensitive to certain forces — and incredibly resilient to others.
Here’s the clean breakdown.

1. Heat
Heat is one of the most powerful forces acting on microbes.
– High heat can denature proteins
– Extreme heat can kill or deactivate most bacteria
– Moderate heat can speed up mutation rates
Some microbes (thermophiles) actually thrive in boiling conditions.

2. Radiation
Radiation is one of the strongest drivers of microbial change.
– UV light causes DNA damage and mutations
– Ionizing radiation (gamma, X‑ray) can break DNA strands
– Some microbes (like Deinococcus radiodurans) can survive massive radiation doses and repair themselves
Radiation is a major evolutionary force.

3. Chemicals
Microbes respond dramatically to chemical environments.
– Acids and bases can destroy cell structures
– Oxidizers (like hydrogen peroxide) damage membranes
– Antibiotics disrupt specific cellular processes
– Toxins can kill or force adaptation
Chemical pressure is one of the fastest ways microbes evolve resistance.

4. Nutrient availability
Microbes change their behavior and genetics based on food sources.
– Starvation triggers dormancy or spore formation
– Abundance triggers rapid reproduction
– New nutrients can force metabolic evolution
This is how microbes adapt to new environments.

5. Physical forces
Even simple physical forces can alter microbes.
– Pressure (deep ocean microbes survive thousands of atmospheres)
– Shear forces (flow, turbulence)
– Desiccation (drying out)
– Freezing
Some microbes survive all of these by forming spores or protective layers.

6. Biological competition
Microbes constantly battle each other.
– Other microbes release toxins
– Viruses (bacteriophages) infect and rewrite their DNA
– Host immune systems apply selective pressure
This is evolution in real time.

7. Time + mutation
Even without external forces, microbes change because:
– They reproduce extremely fast
– Mutations accumulate
– Natural selection acts quickly
A microbe population can evolve in hours.

8. Human influence
Humans are now one of the biggest forces shaping microbial evolution.
– Antibiotic use
– Pollution
– Climate change
– Industrial agriculture
– Wastewater
– Global travel
We’re unintentionally accelerating microbial adaptation.

So what forces can change microbes?
Heat, radiation, chemicals, nutrients, physical pressure, biological competition, mutation, and human activity.

[zerosum]

Hidden war
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/potomac-sewage-spill-repairs-to-take-weeks-longer-after-large-rocks-found-in-pipe/4055406/

Potomac sewage spill: Repairs to take weeks longer after large rocks found in pipe

[zerosum]

TRUTH

Which life form conquered the world?
(Info supplied by copilot)
If we’re talking pure numbers, the winner isn’t even close:
Bacteria — by an absurd margin
Across Earth’s oceans, soil, atmosphere, and inside every other organism, bacteria dominate in both:
– total number of individuals
– total biomass (combined weight)
There are estimated to be around:
10^{30}\mathrm{\ bacterial\ cells}
That’s a nonillion — a 1 followed by 30 zeros.
For comparison, there are “only” about 10^{22} stars in the observable universe.

Why bacteria win
– They reproduce fast
– They live everywhere (deep ocean vents, ice, soil, your gut)
– They survive extreme conditions
– They existed billions of years before animals
They’re the quiet rulers of the planet.

If you meant “most populous animal”
That would be nematodes (tiny roundworms).
There are roughly 60 billion nematodes for every human.

If you meant “most populous large animal”
That’s humans.

If we’re talking pure numbers, the winner isn’t even close:
Bacteria — by an absurd margin
Across Earth’s oceans, soil, atmosphere, and inside every other organism, bacteria dominate in both:
– total number of individuals
– total biomass (combined weight)
There are estimated to be around:
10^{30}\mathrm{\ bacterial\ cells}
That’s a nonillion — a 1 followed by 30 zeros.
For comparison, there are “only” about 10^{22} stars in the observable universe.

Why bacteria win
– They reproduce fast
– They live everywhere (deep ocean vents, ice, soil, your gut)
– They survive extreme conditions
– They existed billions of years before animals
They’re the quiet rulers of the planet.

If you meant “most populous animal”
That would be nematodes (tiny roundworms).
There are roughly 60 billion nematodes for every human.

If by “conquered the Earth” you mean which life form truly dominates the planet, the answer isn’t humans, lions, dinosaurs, or anything dramatic.
It’s the same quiet rulers as before:
Microbes — especially bacteria and archaea — conquered Earth long before anything else existed.
Here’s why they’re the only honest answer.

1. They were here first
Life on Earth is ~3.8 billion years old.
For the first 3+ billion years, the only life was microbial.
Everything else — plants, animals, fungi — is a late‑stage expansion pack.

2. They live everywhere humans can’t
Microbes dominate:
– deep ocean vents
– boiling springs
– Antarctic ice
– radioactive waste
– inside rocks
– inside every plant and animal
Humans occupy a thin surface layer.
Microbes occupy the entire planet.

3. They outnumber everything
Estimated microbial cells on Earth:
10^{30}
That’s a nonillion.
Humans are statistically irrelevant by comparison.

4. They run the planet’s systems
Microbes control:
– oxygen production
– carbon cycling
– nitrogen fixation
– soil fertility
– decomposition
– climate chemistry
If microbes vanished, Earth collapses.
If humans vanished, Earth recovers.

5. They shaped evolution
Microbes invented:
– photosynthesis
– respiration
– DNA repair
– symbiosis
Even mitochondria — the power plants inside your cells — are ancient bacteria that moved in and never left.

So who conquered Earth?
Microbes.
They own the numbers, the time, the territory, and the biochemistry.
Microbes conquered the planet.

————-

[zerosum]

More interpretation of Marco Rubio’s speech (diversion)

February 16, 2026
U.S. Calls For New Colonial Era

U.S. Calls For New Colonial Era

[zerosum]

Massive Drone Attack: Retaliation is Inevitable the Assault on Kostiantynivka
MS For 2026.02.16

———

[zerosum]

@ Michael Reid
Thanks.
China can see.
Iran looking at data.
All Iran needs to do is to pick targets, and use precise firepower.
All USA needs to do is face reality, and implement peaceful actions.

[zerosum]

The world has reached a turning point and course correction is required.

Stop scrolling.
Seriously.
This video explains exactly how AI is about to flip the world upside down over the next 10 years.
Jobs. Money. Power. Everything. Best breakdown I’ve seen and it’s not even close.

What’s the first thing you’d change about how you live right now?

Wrong question.

————–
Here is what, Copilot, My A.I., said:

You’re right to call it the wrong question.

“First thing you’d change about your life” assumes the future is fixed and you just need to adapt.
The real question — the one that actually matters in a decade‑scale technological shift — is something closer to:
What do you want to control before the world starts moving faster than you do?
Because AI isn’t just “changing jobs.”
It’s changing leverage — who has it, who loses it, and who can create it out of thin air.

Here are the questions that actually matter right now:

1. What part of your life do you want to own, not outsource?
AI will automate:
– admin
– analysis
– writing
– coding
– logistics
– planning

So the leverage point becomes:
What do you want to be the human in the loop for?
Decision‑making? Creativity? Leadership? Relationships? Strategy?

2. What skill do you want to be 10× better at because AI amplifies it?

AI doesn’t replace people equally.
It multiplies the ones who already know where to point the machine.
Pick one domain — even a small one — and become the person who uses AI to dominate it.

3. What do you want to build that becomes impossible to catch up to later?

In 10 years, the biggest gap won’t be rich vs. poor.
It’ll be people who built compounding systems vs. people who didn’t.
That could be:
– a business
– a personal brand
– a knowledge base
– a network
– a product
– a workflow
AI accelerates compounding.
Compounding accelerates inequality.
Inequality accelerates opportunity — for the people who start early.

4. What do you want your life to look like when you’re not trading time for money anymore?

Because that’s the real shift:
AI collapses the value of “hours worked” and inflates the value of judgment, taste, and direction.
If you don’t define the life you want, the algorithms will define it for you.

If you want, I can help you sharpen this into something actionable — not vague “self‑improvement,” but a concrete map of where to place your leverage before the curve steepens.

———–
A 12‑year‑old doesn’t need “prepare for the AI revolution” advice.
They need foundations — the kind that make every future technology work for them instead of overwhelming them.
Here’s the kind of help that actually matters for someone that age:

1. Build curiosity, not careers
At 12, the goal isn’t to pick a job.
It’s to build the habit of exploring things deeply.
Ways I can help:
– explain any topic at the level they understand
– turn confusing ideas into simple stories
– help them follow their interests (science, art, coding, history, anything)
Curiosity compounds faster than any technology.

2. Teach them how to think, not what to think
AI will answer questions.
But thinking — comparing, questioning, noticing patterns — that’s the superpower.
I can help them:
– break down problems
– understand cause and effect
– spot good information vs. nonsense
– practice reasoning through examples
This is the one skill that never becomes obsolete.

3. Help them build confidence with tools, not dependence
A 12‑year‑old should learn to use AI, not rely on it.
I can:
– show them how to ask good questions
– help them experiment safely
– guide them through creative projects (stories, drawings, ideas)
– explain how technology works in age‑appropriate ways
Think of it like teaching them to drive, not chauffeuring them everywhere.

4. Strengthen the skills AI can’t replace
The world will automate a lot, but not:
– empathy
– communication
– teamwork
– imagination
– leadership
– resilience

I can help them practice these through:
– storytelling
– role‑free discussions
– collaborative problem‑solving
– explaining their thoughts clearly
These are the traits that make someone irreplaceable.

5. Support their schoolwork without doing it for them
I can:
– explain homework concepts
– give examples
– help them understand mistakes
– guide them step‑by‑step
But I won’t just hand them answers — that doesn’t help them grow.

6. Encourage safe, healthy digital habits
Kids need guardrails, not fear.
I can help them:
– understand online safety
– think critically about what they see
– learn healthy tech boundaries
– build confidence navigating digital spaces

If you want, tell me the 12‑year‑old’s interests — gaming, science, art, sports, reading, anything — and I’ll show you exactly how I can support them in a way that fits who they are.
————-
If we’re talking about “an employer” in the future hiring today’s 12‑year‑old, the real shift isn’t about what the kid needs — it’s about what the employer must become.
Because the next generation won’t thrive under the old model of bosses, managers, or HR checklists. They’ll expect something very different.
Here’s the skillset the employer will need if they want to attract, retain, and empower someone growing up in an AI‑native world:

1. Coaching, not commanding
Future workers won’t tolerate “do this because I said so.”
Employers will need:
– mentoring skills
– the ability to guide, not dictate
– emotional intelligence
– the ability to develop talent, not just extract output
A 12‑year‑old growing up with AI will expect a coach, not a boss.

2. Understanding how to manage humans + machines together
Employers will need to know:
– how to integrate AI into workflows
– how to assign tasks between humans and AI
– how to evaluate work that’s partly machine‑generated
– how to prevent over‑reliance on automation
Managing hybrid teams (human + AI) becomes a core leadership skill.

3. Creating environments where creativity and judgment matter
AI will handle the routine.
Employers must learn to:
– design roles around creativity, problem‑solving, and decision‑making
– reward initiative, not compliance
– build cultures where experimentation is safe
Kids raised with AI will be bored by repetitive work — and they’ll leave.

4. Teaching digital ethics and critical thinking
Employers will need to be able to:
– explain how to use AI responsibly
– set boundaries around data, privacy, and accuracy
– help young workers evaluate information critically
This generation will grow up with infinite information — but not infinite wisdom.

5. Personalization at scale
The old “one‑size‑fits‑all job description” dies.
Employers will need skills in:
– tailoring roles to strengths
– customizing learning paths
– recognizing individual motivation styles
– building flexible work structures
Kids raised in adaptive digital environments will expect adaptive workplaces.

6. Building trust in a world where everything can be faked
Employers must learn to:
– communicate transparently
– verify information
– create psychological safety
– model integrity
Trust becomes a competitive advantage.

7. Lifelong learning leadership
The employer must be the kind of person who:
– learns constantly
– updates their worldview
– adapts to new tools
– encourages others to do the same
A 12‑year‑old today will outgrow any employer who stops learning.

8. Designing meaningful work
AI will automate the boring parts.
Employers must learn to:
– give people work that feels purposeful
– connect tasks to impact
– build missions that matter
This generation will chase meaning, not just money.

If you want, I can map this to a specific scenario — for example:
– What skills a school principal will need
– What skills a business owner will need
– What skills a parent‑employer (chores, responsibilities) will need
– What skills a future CEO will need to lead Gen‑Alpha workers

————-
Who already operates with the mindset and skillset needed to lead the generation that’s 12 today?
And the answer isn’t a single person — it’s a type of person. A pattern. A cluster of behaviors that already exist in certain groups.
Here’s who’s ahead of the curve.

1. People who treat learning as a permanent lifestyle
These are the ones who:
– constantly update their skills
– experiment with new tools
– stay curious instead of defensive
– adapt faster than the environment changes
They don’t fear AI — they play with it.
This includes:
– some teachers
– some parents
– some entrepreneurs
– some creators
– some technologists
Not all. Just the ones who never stopped learning.

2. Leaders who coach instead of command
They already:
– mentor instead of micromanage
– ask questions instead of giving orders
– build confidence instead of compliance
These people naturally fit the future workplace.
You see them in:
– youth sports coaches
– great managers
– community leaders
– certain educators
They’ve already learned the future’s leadership style.

3. People who build systems, not tasks
They think in:
– workflows
– automation
– delegation
– compounding effects
They don’t just “do work.”
They build engines that do work.
These are:
– startup founders
– operations people
– creators who automate their content pipelines
– teens who already run micro‑businesses online
They’re living in the future already.

4. People who understand humans as well as technology
AI can do logic.
But it can’t do:
– empathy
– trust
– motivation
– conflict resolution
People who excel at both tech and humanity are already the new “employers.”
Think:
– therapists who use digital tools
– teachers who personalize learning
– managers who understand psychology
– parents who communicate instead of control
They’re rare — but they exist.

5. Kids themselves
This is the twist most adults miss.
Many 12‑year‑olds already:
– learn faster than adults
– adapt instantly to new interfaces
– think in networks, not hierarchies
– collaborate digitally without effort
– use tools intuitively
They are already the future employers — of AI systems, of workflows, of digital agents.
Some of them are ahead of adults right now.

So who has already learned?
Anyone who is already living in a world where learning, adapting, and guiding matter more than controlling.
It’s not about age.
It’s not about job title.
It’s not about authority.
It’s about mindset.
If you want, I can go one level deeper and map out exactly which traits separate the people who are already prepared from the ones who will be left behind.

————

[zerosum]

The Front Has Exploded: General Engagement in Zaporizhzhia
Military Summary For 2026.02.01

————–

[Author]

Posts