|
|
||||
|
By Jo Nova Iran says the Strait of Hormuz is open, but Donald Trump says “wait”.In other words, the Iranians have blinked first, but the US Navy will stick around until the deal is done properly. Iran has agreed to give up the enriched uranium. It was a “GREAT AND BRILLIANT DAY FOR THE WORLD!” Donald Trump wrote on TruthSocial. Ships apparently are waiting for insurance calls and confirmation. Like a comedy team, France and the UK hosted a multinational teleconference call and bravely offered to lead a mission to protect freedom of navigation in the Strait, which they’ve now realized is important to “the whole world”. Trump wryly remarked that: “Now that the Hormuz Strait situation is over, I received a call from NATO asking if we would need some help”. He told them to stay home, “UNLESS THEY WANT TO LOAD UP THEIR SHIPS WITH OIL“. Adding that “They were useless when needed, a Paper Tiger!” The Australian Prime Minister must be thrilled that he might be spared from further ignominy, as Australia’s pathetic state of energy vulnerability is obvious to everyone, and, if the Strait isn’t opened, we may be mere weeks away from running out of fuel, despite having oil deposits waiting for years to get approval to use. Trump said he was not happy with Australia, and the PM and Treasurer protest on a weaselly technicality, that they weren’t asked for anything. All they had to do, and for free, was just endorse what Trump was doing. When Trump says Australia wasn’t there when we needed them, he is almost certainly talking about moral support, and not our thirty year old frigates. We did send one plane, but when the key moment came, the PM called for a de-escalation which was exactly the opposite of what Trump was doing. Anthony Albanese could have said: “We must stop Iran getting a nuclear weapon.” That would have been enough Australia’s national security swamp means we have diesel subs, but almost no diesel. As Leith van Onselen wrote “Due to its immense size, isolation, and industry composition (i.e., heavy mining and agriculture), Australia is literally one of the most diesel-dependent economies in the world.” And the least prepared. Albanese must have been sweating when the news came in that the refinery was on fire. He talks down the risks, but cut his fuel hunting trip short and flew straight there. And this political mistake is so obvious — the smoke has barely cleared and there is already talk of building another oil refinery in Australia. It would have been a blasphemy two months ago. But times have changed. The PM’s big strategic trip to South East Asia is best described as theatre. He was pleased to tell the world he got 100 million litres of fuel. But the Russians mocked the size: “Daily usage is 92 million liters (sic),” [they] wrote. “Saving Australia 1 day at a time.” A laughing stock…
Left rely on bullying: One in five British teens hide their political views out of fear of ostracism Image by AI_EmeraldApple from Pixabay By Jo Nova Oops the cult programming is showing…One in five British teens hide their political views out of fear of ostracism (and half the rest probably don’t know they agree with them because they’ve never heard them speak.) We all know which side of politics has to hide their views and it’s not the trans-activist communists who believe in using power plants and plastic bags to change the weather. They’re treated like heroes and given a keynote at the UN. But what does someone do when they believe something crazy, counterproductive and resembling witchcraft? — They call it science, and prey upon the young and impressionable. But this approach is vulnerable to people who speak the truth. One little wicked joke about the cult programming can spread like wildfire and undo years of work. The only way to stop the truth going viral spread is a wall of mockery, ridicule and good old social ostracism. The people speaking truth don’t need to shut down opponents with namecalling and social manipulation, but the people pushing a fantasy do — you climate denying, oil shill, racist, conspiracy theorist. This is how the Left control the weak and vulnerable — through coercion and fear. This study was done on 4,000 students, some as young as ten years. No wonder The Blob wants to give 16 year olds the vote. No one is easier to bully. Teens staying silent on politics for fear of being ‘cancelled’Sky News One in five teenagers in the UK do not share their political views due to a fear of being “cancelled”, according to a new report. A survey by the Economist Educational Foundation found that 22% of 15 to 17-year-olds had stopped themselves sharing political opinions because they were worried about criticism, along with 20% of 10 to 14-year-olds. Nearly one in four of the 4,000 students aged between 10 and 17 who took part in the survey said they have been asked to stop voicing their political views at school. The results also showed that 44% of 15 to 17-year-olds said they would not feel ready to vote in the next election. And the big fear of course, is that children might find “online ‘fringe’ communities” where their views might become more right wing…. The Economist Educational Foundation’s chief growth officer, Tiffany Smyly, said the fear of being cancelled could push teenagers to online “fringe” communities where their views could become more extreme. And the solution, of course, is free speech. Let the kids hear both sides free of judgmental coercion and trust that they will figure it out for themselves. Give them the tools to recognise namecalling and bullying, and teach them that Democracy means people are supposed to disagree and open debate is essential. The more crazy the cult, the more extreme the censorship has to be. Last year 12,000 Brits were arrested for tweets they wrote. Starmer and the British Labour Party wouldn’t have to shut down discussion if they could defend their actions. PS: We know this is happening in Australian schools. I know of one situation where girl A has used the threat of ostracism on girl B for just being the friend of Girl C . Girl C’s crime was that she doesn’t openly scorn Donald Trump and is therefore described as “A Trump supporter”. So Girl B (who is actually fairly center left) was subject to the campaign, possibly because she is the softer target. “How can you be friends with her?” The only socially acceptable response is outspoken Trump-hate. April 17th, 2026 | Tags: Coercion, Polls, Survey, YouTube | Category: Global Warming |  Print This Post | | By Jo Nova Well, that can’t be goodDetails are sketchy, but the Viva refinery in Corio, Geelong Victoria is reportedly on fire in a big way. This is (or was) one of Australia’s last two remaining oil refineries supplying 10% of domestic needs. Reports on X and Reddit claim the fire started with an explosion at about 11pm in Victoria, with “flames 100ft high”. The glow is visible from Melbourne. Others report the fire started in the “gas separator unit”. with some saying they heard, as many as 7 or 8 explosions. The Victorian Fire Dept has issued a watch and act and stay indoors for people in Geelong. As many as 16 fire units are attending a “Building Fire” on Refinery Rd, Corio which (at this time) is not yet under control. What are the odds? Speculation is rife: “I’m sure it’s just a coincidence” says every second person. We’re praying the staff are somehow OK, and someone has sent the SAS to guard our other refinery.  Corio Refinery Fire Reddit But we’ll be fine, right? As our energy Minister Chris Blackout Bowen says: “No war can impede the flow of sun to Australia” (only nighttime and clouds can do that…). We’re living in a bubble downunder, and it may have just popped. The ships that have been bringing our oil are mostly ones that were already on the water before the war in Iran broke out. No one is 100% sure what happens next. We are cruising barely a few weeks from potential disaster. This is not a loss of 10% in normal times, it’s potentially a loss of 10% on top of a crisis. It may mean some of the ships we are counting on will not be able to unload and get processed anywhere in Australia. The other refinery, Lytton in Queensland, may be booked at full capacity and it’s not clear whether there will still be storage available in Geelong.
Australians were frustrated that three overseas newspapers appear to have reported on this before the local press. The Mirror. The Express. The Daily Mail. The ABC have now sent a reporter. The billion dollar question is whether the refinery was pushing the safety bounds at a facility presumably being run at full speed under immense pressure, or whether this is no accident. With Australia being a star player in the “Miss Unprepared Nation” stakes, there are few better candidates where one little domestic terror incident could bring us to our knees, begging for oil, and an end to the war. Construction is slowing, petrol stations are running out of fuel and businesses are already talking of shutting down. Flights are being cancelled. Things are so dire, it’s possible we might actually run out of diesel and jet fuel in… three or four weeks. To solve this the Labor government spent $20 million running adverts telling Australians how to improve the fuel economy of their family car. On social media Victorians have been heard saying, Dang, now they’ll have to take the roof rack and the tow ball off the car… How’s that ban on fracking looking now? Victoria not only banned it permanently but enshrined it in the constitution just in case the voters changed their minds. Who exactly are the politicians serving…? It’s 4:30am in Victoria and the extent of the damage to the plant is unknown. I’ll have to leave it to commenters and moderators to update the situation below. Let’s hope the damage is not as bad as it seems. — update: by Raquel (9am local). All refinery staff and emergency workers have been accounted for and there are no reports of injury.At 5.27am (local time), the Country Fire Authority (CFA) said the threat had reduced and people in surrounding suburbs could resume normal activities. Earlier advice had been for residents to remain indoors with windows closed, and to turn off heating / cooling that would draw air in. Viva Energy is one of two oil refineries in the country and supplies half of Victoria’s fuel and 10 per cent of the nation’s. Viva refinery advise there has been no immediate impact on fuel supplies. Federal Energy Minister Chris Bowen says “It will impact on production, and at this point, petrol rather than diesel and jet fuel”. A state govt spokesperson says it is not impacting production or storage. — update: by Raquel (11:30am local) Viva Energy CEO Scott Wyatt says two production units have been damaged, used for petrol production and some other products. While reducing production broadly at the refinery while the situation is handled, Wyatt is confident overall supplies will not be affected and shortfalls will be covered by imports.
UPDATE: Refinery operations face months of disruptionsLuckily Viva Energy can arrange some extra ships of petrol to cover the losses: A fire at Viva Energy’s Geelong refinery is expected to disrupt operations for anywhere between three weeks and three months, threatening a hit to earnings and tightening petrol supply at a critical time for the domestic market, Macquarie has estimated. While Viva Energy has indicated it can offset lost petrol output through imports… If finding extra ships of petrol so easy, why didn’t they do it a few weeks ago? It would have been handy. UPDATE: Labor to stop war in IranWhat is our Defence Minister smoking? Defence Minister Richard Marles has vowed the government would do “all within our power” to turn a temporary two-week ceasefire between the US, Israel and Iran into a permanent peace. Apparently we will use our fuel deficiency, our diesel subs, our non-existent merchant navy and achieve exactly what? What leverage do we have? We’ll stop sending iron ore and gold to China unless Iran plays nice?
By Jo Nova Two trendlines and the climate distraction convergedJust before Easter, the Page Research Centre put out a policy paper that ought to rivet Australians. We have so casually sleepwalked (sprinted) blindfolded to the edge of cliff. Twenty years ago we were self-sufficient in liquid fuels, then we got distracted trying to change the rain and clouds in 2100 AD. Meanwhile in 2013, the area of South East Asia under the potential control of China was starting to grow rapidly. It is only now, after we have closed 6 of 8 refineries, banned oil exploration and shale use in some states in an Ode to Gaia, but we find that at a moment’s notice, China could potentially put three quarters of our liquid fuel supply under threat. “In an Asian war scenario, 76% of our liquid fuel requirements would be in immediate jeopardy.” The situation in 2013 regarding China’s ability to control supply lines:  China’s area of denial capacity 2013 But the world is a different place in 2026:  China’s area of denial capacity 2025 How rapidly we ran towards the pit, closing refineries, assuming it didn’t matter even after China had been dishonest about and leaked a bioweapon, revealing a hostile intent, or at best a callous indifference to our health and welfare.  Figure 10 – Australian domestic liquid fuel demand and supply Remarkably, we don’t use much more petrol than we did 50 years ago. But staggeringly we use nearly five times as much diesel.
 Figure 13 – Comparison of Australian Consumption of major petroleum products in 1975 and 2025 | Page Research Centre We are a diesel nation that would grind to a halt in days if the ships stopped arriving. The two authors of the Page Research Report, Gerard Holland and Jude Blik, lay bare the four options we have, three of which aren’t much use: 1. Diversify our sources — (Good for peace-time, but likely to fall in a whole once a war breaks out).When war breaks out everything changes. Right now, 800 ships are stuck in the Persian Gulf which is about 10% of the official global cargo fleet, not delivering anything to anyone. When 20% of the world is short of oil, no one wants to give it up, so most countries are suddenly competing in the same diversity game. A disruption anywhere in the global oil chain can change the direction of every ship that we don’t control, and we control none, not a single ship. The Australian merchant fleet is zero. With an acerbic wit, they ask the core question that both sides of government forgot to ask: “Given the current reserve requirement is 30 days, do we intend to maintain sovereignty and economic function for longer than a month?” ie. Would you like to still be a country in 30 days? And as they point out, our fuel stocks are public information, and any malign actor could easily use this vulnerability to extort our submission. Indeed, we are encouraging them to do exactly that: …an adversary can tailor a naval capability around cutting off our seaborne supplies, knowing that at some certain future point (determined by our reserves, which are publicly known) Australia would be economically crippled. This allows considerable leverage to intimidate us short of conflict breaking out, since their ability to impose catastrophic pain is so clear. This further encourages an opponent to develop such a capability, since the pay-off is clear. With only 30 days of reserves, and near-total dependence on imports, successfully sinking a single convoy would bring us to our knees. Honing the ability to do this has clear returns for an adversary. 2. Increasing our 30 day fuel reserves is a band-aid:Australia’s pitiful reserves are embarrassing, but we must not be distracted thinking that making them 60 days or 90 days is “the answer”. Increasing our reserves just makes the bridge-to-nowhere a bit longer if we have no destination — that is, no way to restore our ongoing supply. We are still in danger of falling off the cliff. No matter how long our reserves are, the question that matters is how we ensure our fuel supply in a crisis? Security only comes from self sufficiency. 3. Demand Reduction: “Pretend we don’t need oil” Painless demand reduction is an illusion. There are no easy efficiency gains left. We use barely any more petrol now than we did in 1976 (See figure 13), even though the national car fleet has increased from 6 million to 20 million vehicles. As the Page Research team note, even during the pandemic lockdowns, with all the pain that brought, we only saw a 20% reduction in total fuel use. Even if we all caught the bus to school, work, shopping and soccer, (if that were even possible) passenger vehicles only consume 30% of the total liquid fuel demand. And miners and farmers don’t take their 130 ton Haul Trucks, or Combine Harvesters on frivolous trips to the corner store that they can easily do on a bike. 4. Produce oil ourselves If a real war breaks out, the only protection comes from domestic production. We can drill, baby drill for oil and shale, perhaps even approve some fields in less than seven years, but there’s no time to waste. We can also store large reserves of crude oil like the US does in salt caverns. Crude oil needs refining, so we’d need to build-back a refinery or two, but it has a long expiry date. And then there’s the biggie — we can convert our coal into liquid fuel. Something that China is doing at the astonishing rate of 380 million tons a year. Maybe, if we can tame the Maritime Workers Union, the island continent could even afford to own a merchant ship? There is so much more to say… Thanks to Aidan Morrison for pointing me at this report, and Vic in Perth. REFERENCEGerard Holland and Jude Blik (2026) All at Sea: Fuel, War, and Australia’s Achilles’ Heel, Page Research Centre. PDF.
April 14th, 2026 | Tags: China, Diesel, Energy Security | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | By Jo Nova We are killing people by making energy expensiveResearchers followed 80% of the US population for two decades, and found that cold temperatures contributed to a whopping 800,000 deaths while hot temperatures were linked to only 2,000 (per year).* They were looking at monthly temperature data in 819 locations across the US. Then they checked the cardiovascular death rates and found the burden of excess deaths is “quite substantial”. During cold periods our blood vessels contract to reduce heat loss, which is why our skin looks slightly bluer or whiter in colder weather. But even a small reduction in volume makes our blood pressure rise. So it is not surprising that colder months are linked to significantly higher death rates from heart attacks, strokes, and coronary artery disease compared to milder periods. As the population ages and kidney disease and diabetes get worse, the deaths will increase. Nearly every dollar we pour into preventing heat deaths will end up killing more people than it saves. It’s time Climate Ministry’s put more accurate costings on any policy aiming to reduce global temperature. We want numbers, and during cold months the people need cheap oil or gas to keep them warmer. Look at the shape of the curve. Wow!.
 Cold deaths vastly outnumber the warm ones. (MMT = mean monthly temperaure) The ideal temperature for homo sapiens, at least to avoid a cardiovascular death, is apparently 23°C (or 74°F) . Cold weather linked to 40,000 extra heart deaths each year in the U.S.ScienceDaily The relationship followed a lopsided u-shaped curve: both extreme heat and extreme cold raised the risk of death, but the effect was much stronger on the cold side. Researchers estimate that cold temperatures contributed to about 40,000 additional cardiovascular deaths each year during the study period (about 6.3% of all cardiovascular deaths), totaling around 800,000 deaths over two decades. In comparison, hot temperatures were linked to roughly 2,000 extra deaths annually (about 0.33% of all cardiovascular deaths), or about 40,000 over the same time frame. Planning for Climate and Public Health Risks The findings suggest that communities should pay closer attention to the dangers of cold weather when preparing for climate-related health risks. “We tend to focus on heat-related impacts of climate change, but climate change also includes extreme cold. We need to not only have heat-related mitigation measures, but also cold-related mitigation measures,” he said. UPDATE: The study measures outdoor temperatures and not indoor ones and doesn’t account for any extremes, but other studies on indoor temperatures show a strong lopsided mortality curve too, so in a sense the outdoor temperature average is a proxy for a cooler indoor temperature — especially in poorer households. One major confounder in this research is that Vitamin D3 levels and exposure to beneficial infrared from the Sun are also limited in winter. In some ways monthly temperature is a proxy for sun exposure and Vitamin D3 levels. Hence some of the cold associated deaths could be easily prevented by increasing D3 levels, though a substitute for the infrared is not so easily found unless people spend more time outdoors at midday in winter. REFERENCEPedro Rafael Vieira de Oliveira Salerno et al (2026) Cardiovascular disease mortality attributable to monthly non-optimal temperature in the United States: a county-level analysis. American Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 2026; 101514 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpc.2026.101514 *CORRECTIONS: The headline 40 to 1 ratio is actually 20:1. Corrected!. Apologies. Thanks to SH. And 2,000 deaths due to hot weather is per annum.
April 11th, 2026 | Tags: Health, Mortality, Temperature (Effect on Mortality) | Category: Global Warming, Health | Print This Post | |  Image by Pete Linforth from Pixabay By Jo Nova Engineers were warning the grid was close to crashing due to excess solarThe mass blackouts in Spain and Portugal wrecked havoc on April 28 last year. At the time everyone accountable was feigning confusion, blaming it on a “rare atmospheric phenomenon” which might have set up mysterious oscillations in the line. They were bandying around terms like “ ‘induced atmospheric vibration’ and talking about extreme temperatures (you know, like 23 degrees C). But all along, the head honchos at Red Electrica knew it was due to an excess of solar power and a lack of reliable generation, because the technical staff had told them what was coming: “Today was really bad, you all saw it”: new audio recordings confirm that Red Eléctrica knew three months before the blackout that the system was failingBy Paula Maria, Elmundo The Senate committee investigating the blackout heard a second round of conversations this week between private electricity companies and Red Eléctrica, the system operator. Almost a year after the incident, and with no one yet taking responsibility, the latest recordings demonstrate that as early as January 2025, three months before the total blackout, the company chaired by Beatriz Corredor knew that the entire Spanish electricity system was at its limit. They also show that its technicians foresaw an imminent risk— “at some point , we’re going to crash,” they even predicted—and that they had identified the source of the voltage fluctuations: an excess of solar photovoltaic power and a lack of nuclear and gas generation. Once again, the recordings of the incident put the spotlight on the management of the company controlled by SEPI (the Spanish State Holding Company) and call into question the narrative of its leadership. On January 31st, there was such a bad power surge that staff at the Asco nuclear power plant warned, “if the units trip, we’ll be left with zero power .” They went on to say that “Solar power isn’t like wind power, which has inertia. With solar, someone comes along and pushes a button, and if they don’t scale it up a bit, they’ll cause problems, and that’s what happens.” Prophetically, on the morning of the blackout, staff knew exactly what they needed, telling the state’s operator’s control center: “We need more large-scale, thermal generation capacity, which is what regulates the situation.” For a laugh, lets remember those glorious excuses:What caused it?The Guardian April 2025 The Portuguese prime minister, Luís Montenegro, said that the issue originated in Spain. Portugal’s REN said a “rare atmospheric phenomenon” had caused a severe imbalance in temperatures that led to the widespread shutdowns. REN said: “Due to extreme temperature variations in the interior or Spain, there were anomalous oscillations in the very high voltage lines (400 kV), a phenomenon known as ‘induced atmospheric vibration’. These oscillations caused synchronisation failures between the electrical systems, leading to successive disturbances across the interconnected European network.” Not only did the Spanish staff lie to the voters, but most of the media in the West covered up their lies, didn’t ask hard questions, and let them get away with it. The reports are coming out now, but no one who was accountable has been held to account. (Not yet). Will it ever happen? h/t Steve Hicks, @NetZeroWatch
Mysterious line oscillations, –Ruairi UPDATE from commenter Paulie: The final 472 page report — “Don’t mention the Solar Excess”The Final Report into the Spanish blackout was released on 21 March 2026: For those who don’t have the time to read it all, it is a 472 page apology for not being able to identify a clear causal sequence leading up to the blackout. Lots of excuses, including insufficient instrumentation on their lower voltage transmission network, and operators not being able to provide documentation on the behaviour of specific generators. Specifically, the report takes great pains not to identify the generators or specific equipment that were the source of the voltage instability that caused the blackout. But Figure 1-2 on page 10 shows that, on the day of the blackout, that voltage instability started at about 10:30am local time. Figure 1-6 shows how voltage instability resulted in a rapid rise in grid voltage to well outside the normal operating band (max 420kV) within the final minute before the blackout. Again, while this figure identifies some critical events, the report fails to address why the grid operators were unable to deal with this rapid voltage increase. The investigators were able to do one very useful thing: they built a model of the Spanish grid and were able to accurately replicate the behaviours seen on the day. But it takes them until page 311 to produce a result that clearly shows the source of the problems on their grid. Figures 4-114 and 4-115 show the behaviour of grid voltage and frequency, had the grid had eight new synchronous condensers operating. The preceding text provides no technical information on the capacity of those syncons, but the results from their simulation are self-evident. They show that complete failure would not have occurred had the syncons been operational. Had the Spanish grid maintained sufficient synchronous generation, from coal, nuclear, gas or hydro, the blackout would not have occurred. So the authors of the report never say the obvious! The Spanish grid failed because it had too much inverter based energy, and not enough synchronous energy. When instability events happened, the lack of sufficient system strength and inertia caused the grid voltage to increase uncontrollably, tripping numerous automatic safety systems, that led to the blackout event. But you won’t find any such straightforward explanation in the report’s Root Cause Tree 14 factors on pages 333/334.
By Jo Nova The big losers in this war, apart from some former Iranian leaders, appear to be China, and NATO.In the last two months China has lost easy cheap access to cheap oil from Venezuela and now Iran. China was getting around the sanctions and buying discounted Iranian oil through a shadow fleet of ships. It was acquiring as much as 80% of Iranian oil production. Now it has to pay market prices and fight for a limited supply. Meanwhile the divide between the US and Europe is suddenly very obvious. NATO has been shown to be an empty shell. Victor Davis Hanson, the military historian, explains the big picture:GB News: Basically, is this a victory for Donald Trump? Does Does this ceasefire represent a victory for his sort of strategic campaign? Victor Davis Hanson: Well, if it’s honored, it is because when all of the rhetoric and all of the politics vanish, and if they abide by the agreement and we stop and the straits stay open and … if we’re viligant — then it is. He [Trump] comes back and he says when I came into office Iran had the ability to make 11 bombs apparently … we’ve realized they had missiles that would reach Europe. They had shut down, through the proxies, the Red Sea. They had caused October 7th — and they can’t do that anymore at least for the foreseeable future. If they think they’re going going to try, I or any future president can stop them at very minimal cost. This has cost about 50 to 60 billion dollars. It’s about probably a quarter of what was stolen in California under the Newsom regime by welfare fraud. And we’ve lost tragically 13 soldiers. We lost the same amount in one day in Afghanistan getting out of Afghanistan. So if everybody just keeps calm and looks at the actual data, the cost, the benefit, uh, and who wins and loses, … I think in two months nobody’s going to be talking about this if it holds. We’re in an information war. I recommend people watch this to understand just how deep and complete the wall of anti-Trump propaganda is. From the Transcript: A brief history of the last 47 years of the Iranian war — “Death to America” Victor Davis Hanson asks “what was the alternative?”Because for 47 years [the Iranians] had bombed the American embassy in Beirut. There were operatives who bombed us in Tanzania and Kenya. They had kidnapped people and butchered them. They blew up 243 Marines. They probably killed anywhere from 700 to 1,500 American servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan by sending advisers and shape charges to the opposition. They tried to kill Donald they had a plot to kill Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton and they wanted to kill the Saudi ambassador right inside Washington DC. They were supplying the Houthis that were disrupting and causing a lot longer and more extensive damage in the Red Sea, the entry to the Suez Canal. They shut that down for 5 months. And then in addition, we would never have [had] October 7th. None of this would have happened had Iran not supplied Houthis, Hamas, and and Hezbollah. So at some point somebody had to bell the cat and every single administration said they were going to do it. Ronald Reagan said he was going to do it. We had the tanker wars where they did shut down the Hormuz strait. We had then George HW Bush who said this was intolerable. He did nothing. Bill Clinton thought of doing something. He did nothing. George W. Bush — people advised him. People say that Trump is guided by the Israelis. The Israelis told him in 2003 it was a mistake to go after Saddam and it would be a preferable target for Iran which was the nexus really of terror not Saddam. [The US] did nothing about Iran even when they supplied these charges. Then we had Barack Obama and his idea was to appease them and create an alternate nexus of power in Iran and then Damascus and then Beirut and the Gaza and then play that off against the Gulf states in Israel and he would adjudicate as if there was a moral equivalence between the two. That didn’t work. And then we had Trump’s first term — he didn’t want to do this. He put maximum pressure. He sanctioned them. He declared that the Houthi is a terrorist organization. And then they were silent for a while. Soon as Joe Biden came back in, he lifted all the sanctions, all the punitive measures. They got a hundred billion dollars in oil revenue. The Houthis were right back at it. And then he came in a second time, Trump, and he said he was going to … stop this. And I think you could make a plausible argument that they have suffered the greatest military loss in the history of the Middle East as far as the number of missiles, uh, launchers, uh, naval assets. They don’t have an air force. They have shoulder fired missiles now. They will be resupplied by Russia and China, but they still, even when they had air defenses, the Israelis, the United States took them out. The end of the NATO era?Later in the interview Victor Davis Hanson wonders “What’s the purpose of NATO after this latest war?” The US helped the UK and Europe in the Falklands, in Serbia, in Libia, Ukraine, but now weak countries speak against the US and pay the Danegeld to Iran to get their boats through. Iran had long wanted to set up a payment system (effectively extortion) for ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea, and only one country stood against that.
By Jo Nova Finally, a year after the Democrats realized that climate change was a vote loser, the Australian Labor Party are taking their first baby steps to hide their climate zealotry. Even they realize that bragging about renewable energy targets is like juggling sticks of dynamite when the nation is in danger of running out of diesel. Every time someone mentions the 82% target during an oil crisis, it just reminds us how the government have been barking up the wrong tree. Make no mistake, they aren’t renouncing Climate Change, they’re just packing the idea away quietly and hoping no one notices. They are testing-the-waters. After the war, if it’s safe to bring aggressive Net Zero policies back, they can pretend it was just a typo. If it isn’t safe, which it probably won’t be, they will be hoping everyone just forgets. Later they can say there will be no Net Zero targets, while they bring the exact same schemes in under a different name the night before Parliament closes for Christmas. Remember how the hated Emissions Trading Scheme became the SafeGuard Mechanism? Praise be to the Bankers, eh? As long as The Blob gets its funding. Even the Labor Party is trying to stem the loss of voters to One Nation: Any party that polls 30% has a lot of soft power: Renewable target missing from ALP draft national platform— By Greg Brown, and Susan Ison, The Australian Labor has dropped references to its 82 per cent renewables target in a preliminary draft of the national policy platform it will take to the next election due in 2028, but is vowing to use wind and solar power to bring down electricity prices and reindustrialise Australia while blaming coal for grid unreliability. Labor sources are playing down the omission of its goal of 82 per cent by 2030 in the draft, declaring the party remained committed to the target and it was covered in a broader reference to “ambitious and achievable 2030 and 2035 targets”. And we can see they are afraid of Andrew Hastie — they mocked his idea of reviving an Australian car industry, but lookie here — the government want us to become a leader making EVs? An initial draft of Labor’s platform would tie a third-term Albanese government to “urgently” grow the manufacturing base by addressing high energy prices and “poor-quality trade agreements”, while backing Australia as a potential producer of electric cars. Sure, let’s compete with China but with electricity at twice the price? The Labor Government have been caught with their pants down in an energy warThey’ve spent years trying to stop the tides rising by a millimeter a year, when they should have been keeping our oil refineries running, exploring for gas and oil, and setting up coal to liquids plants for national security. And so should the Liberals before them. Let’s just hope the war ends soon… April 8th, 2026 | Tags: Australian Politics, Net Zero | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2026 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
