1. I did a quick look at the comparative air force strengths in a CCP air war with Taiwan, Japan & the US. IMO if he follows the hardliners, Xi risks US air supremacy along the coast in a matter of days. I don't see much of the the bellicose language from CCP hardliners recently
2. perhaps because as reported >20 of our F-22 Raptors are training on Guam. In a potential air war, that's a big deal. The fighter is not just stealthy, it allows the US to dominate the battlefield from a top perch that can directed all other forces.
3. I can envision it as part of a MALD JSOW and HARM stand-off attack that could achieve the destruction of the Chinese coastal antiaircraft facilities much like Baghdad in 1990. Most analysts view CCP as risk adverse. That's why I think the move on Hong Kong evidences CCP
4. recognition of its long-term weakness not strength. I would watch for purging of hardliners. If we don't see it that may mean that they have the upper hand and Xi may have to act. China is essentially an authoritarian military dictatorship.
5. The person in charge is on a bicycle and has to keep peddling because they're being pursued by a pack of jackals.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Tim Hogan

Tim Hogan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TimInHonolulu

21 Jul
1. As I predicted #Taliban are murdering the people who teach girls. This is clearly terrorism and the @StateDept and @WhiteHouse must move to re-list the Taliban as a FTO. If the measure is that they are not directly threatening an attack on the US, then why is the
2. #PKK listed? Taliban terrorizes civilians. The PKK is supported by the civilian population in Northern Kurdistan and along Iraqi border. Turkish occupation forces are the party conducting what could be defined under US law as terrorist operations in Kurdistan not the PKK.
3. The use of the listing process for political expedience IMO voids every charge under FTO listings because it is used as a mechanism to advance US policy goals and not a legitimate definition of an element of a criminal offense. It is used to impair first amendment rights of US
Read 5 tweets
19 Jul
1. For folks who don't know what gets you a perjury charge:

"During his congressional testimony, Ross testified that the Department of Justice requested adding the citizenship question to the census
2. form in late 2017 for the purpose of enforcing federal voting rights law. But the inspector general probe said that “misrepresented the full rationale” since Wilbur’s staff had been communicating with the Department of Justice many months before the request was made."
3. So if the follow up did not pin down to be sure he was saying that was the "only" reason, his statement is facially true but misleading. IMO based on DOJ perjury investigation experiences, that does not support a perjury charge.
Read 4 tweets
13 Jul
1. Here is clip from @POTUS nominee @JeffFlake on the decision to partner with who, at the time, were the #Kurdish #YPG #YPJ to stop the spread of #Daesh (aka #ISIS) in #Syria. This was after disastrous attempt to arm a #jihadist forces who simply gave their weapons to al-Qaeda.
2. I did some searches on Twitter timeline for that period of 2014. America was just waking up to the fact that the #Kurds were our best option to defeat #Daesh. There were risks but the decision has proven to be the correct one. Now under #AANES civilian authority backed by the
3. #SDF that includes Kurds, #Arabs and #Christians, Jeff Flake is a good choice and I applaud @joeBiden's @WhiteHouse and @JakeSullivan46 for thinking outside the box. I sincerely hope @SenatorMenendez
Read 5 tweets
13 Jul
1. What if your cable company allowed someone to knowingly produce false reports about an emergency? Imagine if they gave a private party the power to run a fake emergency message. We had an erroneous imminent missile impact message a few years ago. What if Jeff Bazos
2. could buy the right to publish a message like that on TV and radio just to satisfy a twisted sense of humor? Does he have a right to do that? Does the cable company have the right to do it? Can they both be sued for agreement to it and do they have liability for the damages
3. it causes including emotional distress? I think the answer is they don't have the right to do it and yes they can be sued.

Public nuisance law already gives the government and public power to punish, through civil litigation conduct of that sort. What about the anti-vaxers?
Read 10 tweets
8 Jul
1. All we are doing in Afghanistan is a generation skip. Next group of US service members who will die in Afghanistan are currently in jr. high school. Terrorist don't stop being terrorists because we surrender. They become emboldened.
2. The logic behind this would be consistent with announcing we're pulling out of @NATO because other members didn't evolve in over 75 years to defend themselves. Same for Korea. Evil will always threaten. When we surrender evil wins.
3. The old strategy wasn't bringing peace. The solution is a new strategy not surrender. Look at a map. Taliban are being supplied by Iran, Pak and Russia. Like it or not this is the geopolitical reality of Afghanistan that Russia wants to use as an incubator for terror attacks.
Read 7 tweets
7 Jul
1. Is the Russian state engaged in "international terrorism?"
Here is the 18 USC § 2331(1) definition:
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
2. of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population . . .
3. Would the arrest that is described here be "a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State?" I think it would. So if that element is satisfied, you ask, "does the action
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!