The Korean War by Indy Neidell
Published 4 Feb 2025The fate of the Korean Peninsula stands on a knife edge as Peng Dehuai’s mighty armies gear up to make their move. The US 8th Army continues to push towards Seoul, now backed up by Edward Almond’s 10th Corps to the east. Violent clashes towards the end of the week confirm what both sides already suspect: a great battle is coming, and in this deadly game of thrust and riposte, there can be but one victor.
Chapters
00:00 Intro
00:47 Recap
01:02 Thunderbolt Continued
06:47 All’s Well That Ends Well
11:38 The Twin Tunnels
15:49 Conclusion
(more…)
February 5, 2025
The Korean War 033 – A Deadly Game: China & US Both Attack! – February 4, 1951
Comments Off on The Korean War 033 – A Deadly Game: China & US Both Attack! – February 4, 1951
Trump tariff diary, day 4
The Big Orange Meanie and the Little Potato had a phone call, after which the BOM announced a 30-day delay to the imposition of tariffs. In Canada, all of “peoplekind” were relieved to hear that they won’t have to give up their American-made binkies quite yet. Some appropriate snark from The Free Press:
It was actually a phone call between the BOM and the Little Potato, but we can imagine this is what it would have looked like in person.
Mexican president Claudia Sheinbaum Speedy Gonzales’d her way to a deal with Trump yesterday, promising to deploy 10,000 Mexican troops to the border to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs. In return, Trump agreed to pause his 25 percent tariff on goods coming from south of the border. Soon after, he struck a seemingly identical deal with Justin Trudeau, who said he’d appoint a “fentanyl czar” and promised to send 10,000 Canadian troops to the northern border. Who knew they even had that many?! Tariffs will still be levied against Chinese goods starting today, but Trump says he plans to talk with President Xi Jinping as soon as this week.
The FP isn’t wrong … the Canadian Army doesn’t have 10,000 spare troops just hanging around their barracks who could be sent to the border, so it’s much more likely to be a combination of Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) agents, RCMP officers, provincial police (if the respective provinces are willing), and whatever the army can spare. (Trudeau refers only to “nearly 10,000 frontline personnel”, not “troops” as a lot of US reports state … that seems a lot more achievable.)
You may be wondering how the US President has such disruptive and antagonistic tools at his disposal. It’s yet another hangover from the Carter years, as Congress delegated these powers to the president in 1977:
Donald Trump as Napoleon the 47th.
Image generated by Grok.
The emerging on-off-on-off trade war between Canada and the United States has everyone asking “How should we fight?” — understandably enough — but we should not move too quickly beyond the question “How is this literal nonsense at all possible?” How did the U.S. Congress’s clearly specified constitutional power to regulate the country’s commerce with foreign nations fall into naked and unapologetic decrepitude? Why is every new American president now a Napoleon, and why isn’t this at all a political issue in the U.S.?
The American Constitution, it seems, has no political party apart from a handful of cranky, tireless libertarians like Gene Healy, Clyde W. Crews or Ilya Somin, who has a new article spitballing possible litigation approaches for Americans who lie in the path of the tariffs now being wishcasted into existence by Napoleon the 47th. Somin explains that President Donald Trump is using an openly contrived “national emergency” to invoke powers delegated to the White House by Congress in 1977, powers that are to be invoked only in the face of “unusual and extraordinary threats” to the Republic.
Since the president apparently has plenary power to define an emergency, and to do so without offering anything resembling a rational explanation, this act of Congress now appears to be less of a delegation and more of a surrender — a total abandonment of constitutional principle and the classical separation of powers. I pause to observe that the cheeks every Canadian should redden with slight shame at the spectacle of frivolous recourse to the law of emergencies causing obvious and sickening injury to the rule of law in the U.S. (Oh, no, that could never happen here!)
Beef Tea from a Victorian Hospital
Tasting History with Max Miller
Published 27 Sept 2024Beef tea made with beef, onions, and clove
City/Region: England
Time Period: 1851Beef tea, largely unfamiliar to us now, was all the rage in 19th century hospitals. Believed to contain all of the nutrients of solid beef (not true), it was given to convalescents of all afflictions and social statuses. You can even find it in cocktail books, though you’d be hard pressed to find a bar that serves it today.
This beef tea is surprisingly nice. It’s not really like a beef bouillon or beef stock, and is much lighter in flavor and color. There’s a hint of beef flavor, but I noticed more of a delicious savoriness and unctuousness. While I don’t think it could replace a cocktail, I could see this being lovely on a cold evening.
Soyer’s new way of making Beef Tea
Cut a pound of solid beef into very small dice, which put into a stewpan, with a small pat of butter, a clove, two butter onions, and a salt-spoonful of salt, stir the meat round over the fire for a few minutes, until it produces a thin gravy, then add a quart of water, and let it simmer at the corner of the fire for half an hour, skimming off every particle of fat, when done pass through a sieve. I have always had a great objection to passing broth through a cloth, as it frequently quite spoils its flavor.
— The Modern Housewife or, Ménagère by Alexis Soyer, 1851
Comments Off on Beef Tea from a Victorian Hospital
QotD: Economies and disasters
Here’s a question: Are natural or manmade disasters good for the economy? Dr. Larry Summers, top economic adviser to President Obama, said about the Kobe, Japan, earthquake: “(The disaster) may lead to some temporary increments ironically to GDP as a process of rebuilding takes place. In the wake of the earlier Kobe earthquake Japan actually gained some economic strength.” After devastating Floridian hurricanes, it’s not uncommon to read newspaper headlines such as “Storms create lucrative times”, or “Economic growth from hurricanes could outweigh costs”, or “It’s a perverse thing … there’s real pain, but from an economic point of view, it is a plus”. Then there’s Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman who wrote in his New York Times column “After the Horror”, after the 9/11 attack, “Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could do some economic good”. He went on to explain that rebuilding the destruction would stimulate the economy through business investment and job creation.
One would never hear my colleagues in George Mason University’s economics department spouting such insanities. Just ask yourself whether the Japanese economy would have faced even greater opportunities for economic growth had the earthquake also struck Tokyo, Hiroshima, Yokohama and other major cities? Would the 9/11 terrorists have made a greater contribution to our economy had they also destroyed lives and buildings in Chicago, St. Louis, Los Angeles and Atlanta? The belief that a society benefits from destruction is sheer lunacy.
French economist Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) explained it in his pamphlet “What is Seen and What is Not Seen”. He said, “There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen”. That’s why my George Mason University colleagues are good economists.
Walter E. Williams, “Economics Reality”, Townhall.com, 2020-02-04.
Comments Off on QotD: Economies and disasters
