US: News & Discussions

USIP was where niazi's NSA Moeed Yusuf used to work for
and source of sooth asia commentary along with hudson institute..

======

"There was an effort by USIP employees to physically barricade themselves" in their office to prevent DOGE employees from entering.

Press Secretary Leavitt on the incident that occurred at the USIP when DOGE attempted entry: “It became very clear that there was a concerted effort amongst the rogue bureaucrats at the U.S. Institute of Peace to physically barricade themselves essentially inside the building”


View: https://x.com/realdogeusa/status/1902540848103055515

Each year, the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) receives $55M in congressional (taxpayer) funds.

- Prior management would sweep excess funds into its private Endowment (zero congressional oversight).
-In the past 10 years, USIP has transferred ~$13M to its private Endowment, mainly used for private events and travel.
USIP contracts (now cancelled) include:-
$132,000 to Mohammad Qasem Halimi, an ex-Taliban member who was Afghanistan's former Chief of Protocol.-
$2,232,500 to its outside Accountant, who attempted to delete over 1 terabyte of accounting data (now recovered) after new leadership entered the building-
$1,307,061 to the Al Tadhamun Iraqi League for Youth
- $675,000 for private aviation services


View: https://x.com/DOGE/status/1906848257705443758


View: https://youtu.be/3jnLe4Go0Jk

one of the speakers here is that christopher clary fellow..

Fragile But Intact: Understanding India and Pakistan’s Three-Year Ceasefire​



View: https://youtu.be/1jA4fCsDzyw
 
ezsasa said:
USIP was where niazi's NSA Moeed Yusuf used to work for
and source of sooth asia commentary along with hudson institute..

======

"There was an effort by USIP employees to physically barricade themselves" in their office to prevent DOGE employees from entering.

Press Secretary Leavitt on the incident that occurred at the USIP when DOGE attempted entry: “It became very clear that there was a concerted effort amongst the rogue bureaucrats at the U.S. Institute of Peace to physically barricade themselves essentially inside the building”


View: https://x.com/realdogeusa/status/1902540848103055515

Each year, the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) receives $55M in congressional (taxpayer) funds.

- Prior management would sweep excess funds into its private Endowment (zero congressional oversight).
-In the past 10 years, USIP has transferred ~$13M to its private Endowment, mainly used for private events and travel.
USIP contracts (now cancelled) include:-
$132,000 to Mohammad Qasem Halimi, an ex-Taliban member who was Afghanistan's former Chief of Protocol.-
$2,232,500 to its outside Accountant, who attempted to delete over 1 terabyte of accounting data (now recovered) after new leadership entered the building-
$1,307,061 to the Al Tadhamun Iraqi League for Youth
- $675,000 for private aviation services


View: https://x.com/DOGE/status/1906848257705443758


View: https://youtu.be/3jnLe4Go0Jk

one of the speakers here is that christopher clary fellow..

Fragile But Intact: Understanding India and Pakistan’s Three-Year Ceasefire​



View: https://youtu.be/1jA4fCsDzyw
Click to expand...

Wait, so Niazi had backdoor connection with us establishment , so what about his and youthia's constant rambling about him being deposed in a US-led conspiracy ? it pretty much makes entire situation in al-bakistan pretty muddy about how is supporting which side and for what reason .

Is it reasonable to say that, pak fauj is supported by Chinese elements , who ousted Niazi because was not willing to launch those operations in KPK and Balochistan ? Niazi could have also fell out of favour with muricans
 
Anti-China Peter Navarro in Trump’s Advisory Team Is Good News

Twenty-five years of pro-China economic policies—an outcome of President Reagan’s Cold War strategy to undermine the Soviet Union—have led to China’s rise as a global economic and political powerhouse. This shift came at a tremendous cost to America and its allies, diverting over a trillion dollars in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to China. Meanwhile, past U.S. presidents either failed to recognize or lacked the political will to curb China’s growing influence.

Enter President Trump in his second term, prioritizing the reduction of America’s staggering $920 billion trade deficit—primarily driven by China but also by allies such as Canada, Mexico, and the European Union. This unsustainable imbalance, where America enriches others at its own expense, could not continue. Thus began the process of imposing tariffs to counteract the economic drain on the U.S. Treasury.

To implement this strategy, President Trump appointed Peter Navarro, a non-traditional economist, to help correct decades of flawed trade policies. Under Trump’s direction, tariffs were introduced on imported goods, despite the certainty of retaliatory measures from trading partners. While trade wars generally lead to inflationary pressures, Trump remained unfazed, even stating that if car prices rose due to tariffs, it would ultimately be beneficial—forcing manufacturers to bring production back to the U.S. and rebuild the country’s industrial base.

Is this approach a gain or a loss? In the short term, it presents economic challenges, but over time, the benefits are expected to materialize.

Navarro has argued that these tariffs could generate $6 to $10 trillion for the U.S. Treasury over the next decade while simultaneously revitalizing domestic manufacturing, positioning America as a global industrial leader once again.Navarro believes that ‘Tariffs are tax cuts. Tariffs are jobs. Tariffs are national security. Tariffs are great for America. Tariffs will make America great again’

Main stream economists do not agree with Navarro, but their economic theories have ruined America, hence other theories have to be tried. Trump is just doing that.

While this strategy holds promise, it also has risks and drawbacks that must be carefully assessed. Success will require strong political will to navigate upcoming challenges—something President Trump has demonstrated. While full success is not guaranteed, the long-term outlook suggests significant gains.
 
Globalization Ended on April 2, 2025

With President Trump’s announcement of tariffs on most nations doing business with America, the era of globalization that began under President Clinton has effectively come to an end. Trump made it clear: if you want to sell to America, you have to manufacture in the USA. That is the core purpose of his tariffs. His expectation is that the jobs lost during the wave of globalization will return. As he put it, “Jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country, and you see it happening already.”

This shift will require massive investment in new factories. However, a major challenge is the loss of deep knowledge and experience needed to run them—expertise that has largely disappeared over the last 25 years. Rebuilding this skill base will take time. Advanced industries, such as semiconductor manufacturing, which is currently concentrated in Taiwan, will need to transfer their expertise to the U.S. Taiwanese chip manufacturers had already committed nearly $100 billion to U.S. production even before Trump’s tariffs. Meanwhile, multinational companies like Apple are preparing to expand operations in the U.S.

One of the biggest hurdles will be the disruption of supply chains that took decades to establish. Unraveling these networks and reconstructing them domestically will be a complex and time-consuming process.

There is also a significant economic challenge: the cost of manufacturing in the U.S. is much higher due to substantially higher wages. As supply chains shift back, production costs will rise accordingly, likely triggering inflation. This inflationary trend will persist as more of the supply chain is restructured within the U.S. over time.

China will be hit particularly hard. With a 54% tariff on its exports to the U.S., Chinese goods will become significantly more expensive. In an attempt to circumvent tariffs, China has built factories in Vietnam, Mexico, and other countries—but Trump’s policy aims to treat these products as if they were made in China, closing off that loophole.

I hope Trump succeeds in revitalizing American manufacturing. However, it’s important to recognize that dismantling global supply chains and rebuilding them domestically is an enormous challenge. Time will tell if this bold strategy pays off.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Azaad
Swacch Bharat : News & Discussions.
Replies
0
Views
111
Azaad
Azaad
Azaad
Mainstream Media Watch in India : News & Discussions.
Replies
1
Views
121
Azaad
Azaad
Azaad
India's Wildlife ( Flora & Fauna ) : News & Discussions .
Replies
9
Views
442
Azaad
Azaad
Azaad
US Navy : News & Discussions.
Replies
0
Views
115
Azaad
Azaad
Azaad
HAL HTFE - 25 Turbo Fan : News & Discussions
Replies
6
Views
699
Azaad
Azaad

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

Back
Top