* Bubiyan Island is home to Mubarak Al Kabeer Port, which frequently sees roll-on/roll-off ships used for connecting heavy equipment between Kuwait and other gulf countries.
* It also faces the shallow landing port side of Kharg island.
3/11
* The US has relocated forces from Kuwait to a makeshift base on the island, apparently containing munitions and satellite equipment.
* That base was suddenly struck on April 6th, likely with intel support from China or Russia.
4/11
* It was after this that we suddenly see the desperate “ceasefire” plan from the Pakistani Prime Minister dramatically start to escalate.
* The next day we see his public ceasefire message which many now believe were written by Washington.
* This led to the US suddenly “agreeing” to basically any terms - much to the surprise of Israel.
5/11
* The US turned around the B-52s and declared peace.
* Almost immediately it becomes clear neither side agree on deal terms, and statements get walked back.
So why the sudden position change from the US?
6/11
Nearly all US assets in the Gulf region are in the Arabian Sea, with no way to Kharg.
And because of the mountainous coast line, those landing dock ships are basically only useful in an assault on the port city of Bandar Abbas.
7/11
With no landing craft and minimal covering interceptors, an assault on Kharg would be dangerous.
It would involve small, slow vulnerable craft, or converting commandeered commercial vessels.
8/11
It would also require striking defensive infrastructure in the island, which the US happened to do before their own deadline.
9/11
It seems likely that the US had a plan to:
* Attack somewhere in Southern Iran with sea assets, possibly even as far as Bandar Abbas or Qeshm.
* Use that distraction to launch an assault on Kharg from Bubiyan Island - using commercial ships to transport heavy loads to the existing Kharg docks.
10/11
* Whatever Iran hit on Bubiyan included critical munitions, or transports for that assault.
* So Trump “agreed” to a hasty peace.
* It’s why we see a massive re-supply effort, to resupply and fix whatever was damaged there.
Just in time to put options back on the table after market close.
11/11
It is one of the only outcomes that can reconcile, the strange behavior we’ve seen.
Where Trump was willing to agree to almost anything, and has spent the entire week backtracking.
It was just a ploy for time.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Most parts of it only reach 64F (18C) averages in the heat of the summer.
Its density and climate also means it gets very little evaporation compared to its rainfall, and is subject to frost 9 months of the year, and heavy fog the rest of the time.
This kept this biome very humid, kept soil damp, and left most of the low level foliage coated in dew all day long.
Some parts of the forest even had thick levels of permafrost beneath the topsoil that on rare hot days would seep water back into the ecosystem.
Just as many wildfires started by lightning strike in previous decades as now.
The difference is they struggled to catch and spread in this damp environment.
Now extreme dry weather, record breaking heat, northern thaw, erode that protective moisture barrier, leaving the boreal forest vulnerable especially in the more southern parts.
Boreal forests previously went through this process naturally when an over density caused a drier environment you’d get high-intensity crown fires that were cyclical. Every 50-200 years depending on region.
Now we get them annually.
Boreal forest fires are much more severe than others too. The long history of cyclical burns means the soil contains charcoal, the thick multi-layer foliage adds fodder and causes the fire to spread quickly, and pine, spruce, and aspens are all some of the trees with both the most density and the best for wood burning.
It results in towering forest fires of immense heat and rapid spread.
These forests are denser than anything else in North America or Europe, and the current fire in Ontario alone, is the same square mileage as the entire state of Delaware.
From the time it ignited, to covering that size, took less than 20 hours.
While some in the US still think climate change is a hoax, we are all going to deal with the consequences of it, as we’ve turned the largest forest in the world into a tinder box, and fires in less than 0.01% of it drowns the entire continent in smoke.
Realized a MASSIVE hole in Thomas' reasoning that would create a chaotic loophole:
* A child born here to non-US parents could end up Stateless but present in the US.
BUT that's an issue:
-Under INA § 101(a)(42), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42) an asylum claim regarding being 'stateless' is not enough for asylum to be granted.
2/7
BUT, if they are stateless because they were denied registration of their birth or citizenship in the country they were born because of ethnicity, social group, or nationality, that is a valid asylum case.
The child must be allowed to stay.
3/7
Even prior to that standards on holding of withdrawal (INA § 241(b)(3), 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3).) mean that we cannot remove someone to a country other than:
* Their country of citizenship
* Their country of last entry
The child has neither a country of citizenship or of last entry and cannot be removed - and you cannot detain them if removal is not foreseeable (Zadvydas v. Davis.)
Trump has ERODED the US' global footprint in a way that will likely shape the world for the next century:
-Ending US aide
-Failing to stand up for Ukraine
-Violating sovereignty in Venezuela
-Weak statements on Taiwan
-Folding on Iran
-Having China push Iran to the table
-Ending US development investment in Africa and Latin America
-Trade wars with South East Asia
-Pushing Canada and the EU into deeper trade relations with China
These have all rapidly diminished the US global sphere of influence, to the smallest its EVER been in the modern era.
2/10
The US spent a century building a sphere of influence that was broad and unchallenged.
It triumphed through cultural export that came on the backs of economic development and unwavering defense agreements.
America was a country you could trust, and it's help was of value.
4/10
Under that doctrine, the US had it's peak global influence around the 2000s, especially as this aligned with EU peak influence and the EU was an unwavering US ally against the China-Russia axis.