Saudi Arabia began seesawing its crude oil exports back east before the Petroline was even hit. They got TWICE AS MUCH (2Mbpd would have been plenty enough for refining) amount of crude flowing through the Petroline pipelines within a little over a week, and likely a sufficient amount sooner than that.

ARAMCO has 24/365 access to spare parts for every single little piece of infrastructure.

Iranian customs data reviewed by The Wall Street Journal lists around 1,300 shipments of dual use components sent from China to Iran's defense ministry between January and June 2026.

Among them were electronics with applications in drones and missile guidance systems.

One shipment cleared into Tehran on the same day Beijing was publicly touting its role in easing tensions in the Middle East.

China has become the only major buyer of Iranian oil, despite U.S. sanctions meant to stop the flows, providing billions of dollars for Tehran this year. Chinese front companies help launder the funds, while Chinese banks route the transactions through the country’s financial plumbing, using China’s currency, to evade U.S. oversight, U.S. officials and people familiar with the flows say.

On the battlefield, satellite imagery procured from Chinese entities has been linked by U.S. officials to an Iranian strike that killed three American troops, the Journal has reported. Chinese companies have also helped provide chemical precursors used to manufacture the types of ballistic missiles used in the attack, according to a document viewed by the Journal and people familiar with the matter.

The actions illustrate a level of Chinese support for Iran that hasn’t been previously reported or publicly acknowledged by the Trump administration. That support has helped extend a conflict that is increasing global energy prices, draining weapons stockpiles and heaping pressure on Trump ahead of the midterm elections.

Beijing said it consistently abides by international rules and opposes “attempts to smear China by associating it with the conflict.” It said China maintains cooperation with Iran and supports all efforts toward peace in the Middle East.

In the past, China has said it strictly regulates the export of dual-use components, which can serve both civilian and military purposes. It has said it rejects unilateral U.S. sanctions, including those that punish unauthorized trading of dual-use materials, saying the sanctions violate international law.

Iranian officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Washington has launched hundreds of sanctions targeting Iran since the war began on Feb. 28, including penalties against companies and individuals in China it believes are helping Tehran.

Those steps, along with an embargo of Iranian trade, have caused a contraction of Iran’s economy.

But the White House has proven reluctant to more seriously confront Beijing over its support for Iran, which has continued launching attacks on U.S. forces and oil infrastructure in the Middle East. Trump has made improved relations with Beijing a priority after a tariff war last year showed China has options to hurt the U.S. economy, including restricting American access to rare earth materials.

Ahead of this week’s summit, Trump told top officials and aides that maintaining good relations with Xi is a priority, people familiar with the discussions said.

As a result, senior officials have repeatedly played down the significance of Chinese aid to Iran, avoiding criticism of Beijing that could jeopardize the meeting.

Many within the administration believe the reluctance to take on Beijing is weakening America’s ability to pressure Tehran. Lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle have called on Trump to confront Xi more directly.

“There is now a large and growing body of evidence that Chinese companies are helping Iran target and kill American troops, keep Iran’s drone and missile programs alive, and sustain Iran’s economy,” Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat, wrote in a letter to Trump on Friday that was shared with the Journal. She urged Trump to make Chinese support for Iran a “centerpiece” of his talks with Xi.

Trump brushed off concerns about Chinese support for Iran when asked earlier this month whether he would raise the issue with Xi. “I think he’s behaved reasonably well, and we behave reasonably well,” he said.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. and China would have “a very frank conversation” at the Xi-Trump summit. “We’ll talk about everything that’s relevant. We’ll talk about everything that’s important,” he said.

“The idea that we would not interact with them at the highest levels is irresponsible.”

A spokesperson for the Treasury Department said it maintains an active channel with Chinese counterparts and won’t hesitate to act when warranted.

“This administration has repeatedly targeted malign Iran-related activity that exploits or transits China’s jurisdiction and will continue to do so,” the spokesperson said.  

The White House has said it is working aggressively to disrupt and penalize anyone who does business with the Iranian regime.

In backing Iran, Beijing hopes to undermine Washington’s diplomatic standing and draw down U.S. weapons inventories, weakening it militarily, political analysts say. Yet China is also wary of going too far.

It values economic ties with America, and as the world’s largest energy importer, China suffers if the oil shock caused by the conflict drags on, political analysts say.  

Air shipments

The shipments to Iran’s defense ministry that were reviewed by the Journal are part of a surge in flights with cargo from China to Iran this year.

The air bridge has become a crucial supply route for Iran’s drone and ballistic-missile programs as the U.S. Navy blocks Iranian sea trade, defense experts say.

The shipments have arrived at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport. The boxes are packed with GPS tracking devices, electric motors and aircraft engine parts, according to Iranian customs records provided by trade database ImportGenius.

Records from January 2025 to the end of June this year show thousands of shipments to Iran’s defense ministry and Iranian companies of items that can be used to build drones and other weapons.

Many of the entries are marked with a reference to “Article 119,” a section in Iranian customs regulations that grants full tariff exemptions for armaments and defense imports.

China has offered economic and military support for Iran for decades. But the two sides deepened ties after the Trump administration in 2018 launched a “maximum pressure” campaign to cut Iranian oil exports to zero and force Iran to negotiate over its nuclear program.

The campaign included sanctions penalizing foreign entities that helped Iran, cutting them off from the U.S.-led global financial system.

Rejecting those rules, Tehran and Beijing signed a 25-year strategic pact in 2021. China became Iran’s biggest oil importer, buying up more than 80% of its crude exports, according to U.S. lawmakers.

An elaborate network of Chinese banks and Hong Kong shell companies evolved to help Iran evade sanctions and keep the oil flowing, the Journal has reported.

M/T Celestial Sea, an Iranian-flagged oil tanker.
U.S. Marines boarded an Iranian-flagged commercial oil tanker suspected of attempting to violate the U.S. blockade on May 20. USMC
Hong Kong said it enforces United Nations sanctions but not those imposed unilaterally by nations, which it says violate international law.

Chinese exporters of dual-use goods and electronics also began attending trade fairs in Iran, translating their corporate slogans into Farsi to build local ties, according to an analysis of social-media posts by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

In the following years, Chinese companies produced for Iran chemical materials such as sodium perchlorate, which is used to make propellant for ballistic missiles.

The exports became more important for Iran after Israel largely destroyed its missile program in attacks in 2024, forcing the regime to replenish its arsenal.

The sales became widely known when the Journal and other media reported on them in 2025.

U.S. forces later that year raided a ship carrying dual-use components from China to Iran, signaling that Washington was watching.

One Chinese company that attempted to sell chemical materials, Haokun Energy, told a U.S.-sanctioned importer of products for Iran last December that exports of sodium perchlorate required government licenses.

It said it had coordinated with Chinese authorities “to process part of the licenses confidentially,” Haokun wrote in a letter viewed by the Journal.

Treasury had earlier sanctioned Haokun and the importer for helping Iran sell oil to China. The December letter said Haokun had set up a Beijing-based shell company for the sodium perchlorate transaction.

The Journal verified the company was established weeks before the letter’s date. It couldn’t be determined if the deal progressed.

Haokun didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Material for Shaheds

Days before the U.S.-Iran war began, Iranian customs data showed a delivery of 300 tons of chemical compounds from China to Iran’s ministry of defense.

Once the war started, trade between Iran and China initially collapsed, according to Iranian customs data and Kpler, a research firm that tracks oil shipments.

The U.S. Navy blockade of Iranian ports, announced in April, further tightened the noose.

Tehran responded by expanding air links between China and Iran via Mahan Air, an Iranian airline sanctioned by the U.S. that Treasury says has ferried cash, weapons and personnel for Iran.

The airline increased flights from Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou to Tehran to about 27 a week by the end of April from four at the start of March, according to FlightRadar24 data.

Air shipments to Iran’s ministry of defense accelerated, customs data show. Mahan didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Researchers who track trade with Iran say the shipments involve little-known Chinese suppliers working with Iranian importers.

Some of the components on offer are known to be used to make Shahed drones, said Kate Koren, deputy director of the economics program at CSIS in Washington. The cheap but deadly Iranian drones have caused significant damage to U.S. bases.

In a soon-to-be-published report, Koren said she found several Chinese companies that had publicly advertised sales this year for sensitive electronics, including those found in the Shahed.

In May, Treasury sanctioned Chinese and Hong Kong-based companies it said were trying to help Iran acquire weapons, including shoulder-fired missile launchers.

A video posted that month on Iran’s Tasnim news agency, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, showed members of the militia getting training on how to use the missile launchers, known as manpads, to shoot down U.S. fighter jets.

Iran currently operates manpads that it manufactures inside the country based on older Chinese versions, according to former Treasury officials.

But Iranian officials want access to China’s latest models, which are more effective, the former officials said.

Over the following weeks, U.S. officials sanctioned more Chinese individuals and companies for procuring weapons for Iran’s military and the IRGC.

One of the procurement networks tried to buy manpads for Iran’s Center for Innovation and Technology Cooperation, which works to adapt foreign-made weapons to be produced at home, U.S. officials said.

The group tried to deliver the manpads to Iran via Belarus to obfuscate the Iranian end-user, but it wasn’t successful, U.S. officials said.

‘I trust them’

On June 17, the U.S. and Iran signed a 60-day truce. Days later, Iranian customs noted air shipments from China with more than $6 million of electronics components that the U.S. government has said are used for a variety of military purposes, including in flight control units for precision-guided weapons.

In July, the U.S. added new sanctions on individuals and companies working for Mahan Air, including a China-based company it said acted as a sales agent for the airline, coordinating the transport of electronics.

The U.S. issued more than 100 additional sanctions that month.

But divisions were deepening within the administration over how hard to press China.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers in July that China, along with Russia, was enabling Iran “at different levels.”

Days later, Trump pushed back. “I don’t know that they’re enabling,” he said, insisting that Xi had personally assured him China wouldn’t provide Iran with weapons.

“I trust them,” he said of Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “There could be some things they do. But thus far, at least, it has not been major.”

The same week, after meeting Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Manila, Rubio told reporters that “nothing that China has done has in any way changed the trajectory” of the conflict.

Beijing had in some instances been “quite cooperative,” he said.

Behind the scenes, U.S. officials were trying to tighten the screws on support for Iran involving China.

In one episode, U.S. officials identified sales of petrochemical products from Iran to Egypt, being paid for with U.S. dollars, violating U.S. sanctions.

The transactions were handled through the United Arab Emirates branch of Banque Misr, an Egyptian state-owned bank, according to several people familiar with the transactions.

Treasury authorities sent warnings to the bank to stop, the people said.

Instead, Banque Misr switched the payments to China’s yuan currency. They were to be cleared through the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System, a Chinese financial network in which transactions are harder for U.S. authorities to track, the people said.

The plans eventually failed, as U.S. officials became aware of them, communicating their disapproval to Egyptian officials, according to the people.

Treasury later went after Banque Misr, calling its U.A.E. branch “a critical node” for Tehran’s financial activities and moving to cut its access to U.S. dollars.

Egypt’s foreign ministry and Banque Misr said they were communicating with U.S. authorities about Treasury’s allegations. Banque Misr added that it respects “relevant regulatory and legal frameworks.”

The episode created tension between China and Egypt, with Beijing suspicious that Egyptian officials had shared information with the Americans, people aware of the details said.

Xi himself brought the issue up in a summit with Egypt’s president in Cairo earlier this month, one of the people added.

Satellite images

Some Trump officials and U.S. national security officials still thought the U.S. wasn’t doing enough.

Concerns grew more urgent after U.S. officials concluded Iran had used Chinese satellite imagery before and after a July 17 strike that killed three U.S. troops, linking it directly to the attack.

The Trump administration had already sanctioned three Chinese satellite-imagery companies in May for providing data it said could help Iran target U.S. forces.

In late August, Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent launched “Operation Economic Outcast,” a program to “sever every economic lifeline” sustaining the Iranian regime.

The U.S. added sanctions against a China-owned oil tanker that transported Iranian oil and a network of Chinese companies and individuals that helped Iran obtain critical components.

But no major Chinese companies were targeted.

When reporters twice asked Bessent whether the administration would strengthen sanctions against Chinese banks and businesses, Bessent declined to single out China, saying that “every country” should be prepared to face U.S. sanctions.

Although the U.S. blockade has made it much harder for Iran to export oil, some keeps flowing to China.

About four million barrels were delivered to China in the week after “Operation Economic Outcast” was launched, according to Kpler calculations.

Mahan Air, meanwhile, flew from China to Iran 39 times in the first week of September, double its prewar level, according to FlightRadar24.

Many of the flights appear to be focused only on cargo, rather than moving passengers.

Many tracked by FlightRadar24 in early September, for example, weren’t available for booking on the airline’s website.

Last week, Iranian state-affiliated media said Mahan would suspend flights to Oman and Turkey. But the airline continues to fly to China.

A Hamas commander who held seven Israeli hostages in captivity during the war was killed in a strike in Gaza City over the weekend, the military announces.

The strike killed Mahmoud Abd al-Fattah Awad, who the military says held hostages Daniella Gilboa, Karina Ariev, Doron Steinbrecher, Naama Levy, Ziv Berman, Omri Miran, and Eitan Mor in a tunnel in Gaza City.

Recently, the Hamas commander planned and advanced attacks on troops and Israeli civilians, and acted to restore Hamas capabilities, "in systematic violation of the ceasefire," the military says.

Separately, the army also confirms killing Hamas's chief financial officer in southern Gaza yesterday.

Muhammad Abu Alwan, who served as head of the terror group's finance department, directed the transfer of over a billion dollars to Hamas during the war, according to the IDF and Shin Bet, "making him a key figure in maintaining the terrorist organization’s rule and survival."

Abu Alwan had also been involved in restore Hamas infrastructure, in violation of the truce, the military says.

Israeli-Ukrainian visiting Uman for Rosh Hashanah detained, conscripted into Ukrainian military

Originally Posted By Prime:

A diesel export ban won’t help fix rising fuel prices. Here’s why. \uD83D\uDC47\uD83E\uDDF5

American Petroleum Institute  (@APIenergy) September 23, 2026

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS6H7IoXIAAx0wu?format=jpg&name=medium

The U.S. supplies roughly 20% of globally traded seaborne diesel. An export ban would remove that supply from the market, exacerbating the global refining shortage that is driving the current high-price environment. pic.twitter.com/mmonL6wGft

American Petroleum Institute  (@APIenergy) September 23, 2026

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS6H9fJXQAAS19l?format=jpg&name=medium

The Gulf Coast holds 54% of U.S. refining capacity and makes more fuel than it uses. The East Coast relies partly on imports. Banning exports would trap surplus diesel in one region while tightening the global market that supplies another. pic.twitter.com/XbJVnO6ePq

American Petroleum Institute  (@APIenergy) September 23, 2026

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS6H_omXoAAb5kJ?format=jpg&name=medium

Refineries produce gasoline, diesel and jet fuel together, with limited flexibility to change the mix. Block diesel exports, and surplus fuel could fill storage, forcing refineries to process less crude. That means less of every fuel and more upward pressure on prices. pic.twitter.com/AfXqmW7vCE

American Petroleum Institute  (@APIenergy) September 23, 2026

A diesel export ban could mean less U.S. fuel production, global economic damage and higher prices at home. Exports and imports enable refineries to maintain their current record rates of production and put more fuel into the market. Read more: https://t.co/tp5P8R18iO

American Petroleum Institute  (@APIenergy) September 23, 2026

I just woke up and see talks about Diesel export bans are raging - All those people are overlooking one KEY detail: US IMPORTS THE CRUDE OIL TO MAKE DIESEL

Now tell me, if US bans export of Diesel to Mexico for example do you expect \uD83C\uDDF2\uD83C\uDDFD will sell \uD83C\uDDFA\uD83C\uDDF8 the crude to make Diesel? https://t.co/WHxo347jGI

JustDario  (@DarioCpx) September 23, 2026

To make the diesel export ban make any sense, the US will have to ban exporting it only to countries that provide no meaningful energy inputs. Again, the diesel export ban will likely fall mostly on the shoulders of Europe because of its retarded vassal leaders. \uD83C\uDDEA\uD83C\uDDFA https://t.co/pknvbLIvRq

Philip Pilkington  (@philippilk) September 23, 2026

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS4hJiJWIAAfcQt?format=png&name=900x900

Looks like UK will be worst hit in the short-term with 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 barrels of diesel lost. Ireland imports 40% of its diesel from UK, so 2 in 5 barrels lost there. Both countries will suffer severe fuel shortages and logistics breakdown after the US ban. \uD83C\uDDEC\uD83C\uDDE7\uD83C\uDDEE\uD83C\uDDEA https://t.co/14UELZcttq pic.twitter.com/KqLpNtkAWe

Philip Pilkington  (@philippilk) September 23, 2026

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS5GLLcWgAA8pNI?format=jpg&name=medium

\uD83D\uDEA8 American "Energy Dominance" is turning inward as Trump weighs a U.S. diesel export ban.

Spurred by record fuel costs and election vulnerabilities, Washington's potential shift toward energy nationalism could upend global trade flows.

Here is the breakdown: \uD83D\uDC47\uD83C\uDDFA\uD83C\uDDF8\uD83C\uDDEC\uD83C\uDDE7\uD83C\uDDEB\uD83C\uDDF7\uD83C\uDDE7\uD83C\uDDF7\uD83C\uDDF2\uD83C\uDDFD\uD83D\uDEE2? pic.twitter.com/OwTFfkmvGI

— Francesco Sassi (@Frank_Stones) September 23, 2026

U.S. Diesel Export Ban

The elimination of 1.67 million barrels per day of diesel exports will create a short-term domestic surplus which will have to then be sold at a discount thus providing short-term pricing relief for U.S. households and talking points for policy actors to claim that they are addressing a growing affordability crisis.

However, once one examines such a policy approach the ill-logic of a diesel export ban is all too easy to spot: a temporary increase in supply following such an export ban will quickly turn into a supply shortage and rising prices.

Because the U.S. exports it surplus production-total production is roughly 5.3 million barrels per day which is above the approximately 3.6 million barrels per day of domestic demand-once that inventory is absorbed by the domestic energy firms would then pull back on production until it reaches the new and lower equilibrium level which of course would result in lost revenues and a probable increase in industry unemployment on the back of that intervention into the marketplace.

An export ban intending to increase supply results in a shortage of not just diesel but also likely gasoline as the crude that was previously dedicated to the production of diesel then needs to be sold resulting in increased exports of raw crude at higher prices.

As a result a bifurcated price structure domestically that would ensue-there are multiple markets within the U.S. with the Gulf Coast seeing a lower price versus higher prices on the West Coast and prices remaining closer to the internationally set price on the East Coast-creating further uncertainty across the economy.

Even with the logistics constraint-the Jones Act-which required all goods transported by water between U.S. ports to be on American owned and staffed ships-being temporarily lifted this will not eliminate the bifurcated price structure that would ensure in the aftermath of such an energy export ban.

Increasing complexity within an antiquated energy infrastructure is in no one’s economic or policy interest.

Second, such a ban would result in the elimination of that 1.67 million in U.S. diesel exports reducing the total global supply by just over 18%.
That will send global prices higher creating conditions in which those costs will be passed along to the production of other goods which the U.S. imports.

Given global supply and inflation dynamics this would result in a negative feedback loop that would result in an already deteriorating international pricing environment that would likely cause global central banks to send policy rates higher than they already are prepared to do.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS1_RhLWoAAHWVW?format=png&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS1_qdzWgAA2eRe?format=png&name=900x900

U.S. Diesel Export Ban

The elimination of 1.67 million barrels per day of diesel exports will create a short-term domestic surplus which will have to then be sold at a discount thus providing short-term pricing relief for U.S. households and talking points for policy actors to… pic.twitter.com/1PsoDTk3aB

Joseph Brusuelas  (@joebrusuelas) September 22, 2026

First off the nerds aren’t thinking creatively enough.  

Second the primary objective is to fuck the rest of the world.  Price at the pump is secondary.  

There are clear objectives for anyone actually paying attention.  

Escalate Iran. Regime change. Let them destroy whatever gulf infrastructure they can get their hands on.

Kill every single person in the IRGC.  From the sky.  Indiscriminately.  Just bomb and bomb some more. Use AI and drones to target.  

Europe panics. Asia panics.  Beg for LNG exports.  

Meanwhile Ukraine keeps hitting Russian energy infra.  Oopsie.  

Incredibly confusing times for the flag in bio crowd.

Hit Canada with 100% tariffs. Excludes albertan energy from said tariffs.

Emergency measures to ramp VZ supply. Takes time? Who cares, good enough to justify draining SPR to zero.

Mail some checks.  Tax some energy companies.  Mail some more checks.

Win midterms.  

Decouple from China.

This isn’t rocket science folks.

First off the nerds aren’t thinking creatively enough.  

Second the primary objective is to fuck the rest of the world.  Price at the pump is secondary.  

There are clear objectives for anyone actually paying attention.  

Escalate Iran. Regime change. Let them destroy… https://t.co/mlwTutm36E

Just Another Pod Guy  (@TMTLongShort) September 23, 2026

Originally Posted By Longshore87:

Ok, we now have the actual text of the Greenland deal (https://t.co/HwqZT6CGb2), so we can say how it compares to the existing 1951 arrangement and who, between Trump and Denmark, lied the most in their framing of it.

Long story short - which may surprise some - the Danes lied… https://t.co/DPM2iFkN4v

Arnaud Bertrand  (@RnaudBertrand) September 23, 2026

Ok, we now have the actual text of the Greenland deal (whitehouse.gov/briefings-stat…), so we can say how it compares to the existing 1951 arrangement and who, between Trump and Denmark, lied the most in their framing of it.

Long story short - which may surprise some - the Danes lied the most: Trump is pretty much correct in saying that this new deal grants the US control of Greenland.

Let's look into what changed compared to the 1951 deal.

1) This is now a permanent arrangement: whereas the existing 1951 deal only lasted as long as NATO existed, this one "does not have an end date and may only be amended by mutual consent."

It even survives a hypothetical future independence of Greenland: in that event, Denmark and Greenland must ensure that the independent Greenlandic state "affirmatively assume[s] all of the rights and obligations of the Kingdom of Denmark specified in this Agreement."

2) In the 1951 agreement, the US could set up bases only where both governments agreed, and only on the basis of NATO planning. The new deal locks in three bases: the US can "modernize and expand its activities" at Pituffik, its only base in Greenland until now, and "shall be allowed to establish an additional Defense Area at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig." Further bases beyond these 3 can be justified by the defense of "the American continent," a US interest rather than a NATO one.

Also, quite subtle but this is interesting: Article IV(iii) says  that "the United States may establish additional defense areas in Greenland" and that consultations are then held "to decide implementation details based on mutual agreement." What this means is that the principle of a new base is automatically granted and only the implementation details require agreement.

Article VII also gives the US "the right to raise concerns regarding construction, or change of use" of any building near a US base, after which the parties decide together what to do. Which means that the US has a say over civilian planning around its bases.

3) On US military movement across Greenland, the wording change between the 1951 agreement and this new one is quite funny.

The 1951 text said (Art. V(3)): the US "may enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea," but only "in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland."

The new one says: "the United States of America shall enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the Defense Areas through Greenland, including the Territorial Waters, by land, air and sea."

That's it: "May" becomes "shall," and the US military movement no longer has to follow rules "issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland." The US also gets something new on top: "undersea access to and movement within the Territorial Waters," i.e. submarines.

4) Non-NATO exclusion: non-NATO states are barred from military installations or a persistent presence in Greenland unless all three parties approve, giving the US an effective permanent veto. The 1951 deal had no equivalent clause.

5) Investment screening: this is entirely new. "States or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state" (i.e. Russia, China, India, the Gulf States, etc.), "shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information...within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties."

Again, it basically means that the US has a permanent veto over who can invest in strategic sectors in Greenland, as far as non-NATO or EU states are concerned.

6) Lastly, in stark contrast with the 1951 deal, the framing of the deal changes significantly: this new deal is largely framed around the US.

The 1951 agreement existed only "for the benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization." The new one lists the defense of "the American continent" as an objective, celebrates "the irreplaceable role" of the United States military as well as "the United States' indispensable historical and ongoing contributions to the security and defense of Greenland," and names the establishment of Trump's "Golden Dome" missile defense system as a key goal.

So, to sum up:
- The US secured a permanent military foothold that even an independent Greenland would inherit whether it likes it or not
- The US now has veto power over any non-NATO military presence in Greenland, and over who can invest in its strategic infrastructure and resources (beyond NATO and the EU)
- Denmark signed away its say over the principle of new US bases, with only the right to discuss the "implementation details"
- Danish authorities no longer set the rules for US military movement across the island
- And all of it is now justified by the defense of "the American continent"

I don't know in which universe this even remotely "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination," as Danish PM Mette Frederiksen put it (stm.dk/en/press/press…).

Yes, the preamble of the text cynically "reaffirms" Danish sovereignty but, in my book, when you let a foreign country put bases on your soil, move its troops without following your rules and veto who else can come in, in perpetuity, after it spent two years threatening to take you by force, the word for that is anything but "recognized sovereignty" 🤷

Originally Posted By Prime:
Extremely heavy Ukrainian artillery and MLRS shelling, along with intense drone attacks, continue on Russian positions close to the frontline, as well as in the tactical and strategic rear, supporting the ongoing offensive operations

Originally Posted By Prime:


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS7fXTLXYAAMmh_?format=jpg&name=medium

The F-35 parts that were accidentally shipped to China, a cockpit canopy and bay door, have been taken into possession by the Chinese government, according to Bloomberg, citing people briefed on the matter. The parts were from an Australian Air Force F-35 that was being shipped… pic.twitter.com/1sowqxwgM0

OSINTdefender  (@sentdefender) September 23, 2026

For decades, China’s state security and intelligence services have sought info about sensitive U.S. military technologies associated with the low-observable characteristics of windshield and canopy of 5th Generation fighter jets.

Now, Australia has potentially handed China this valuable technology through an extraordinary mistake: an F-35A canopy was shipped to Hong Kong.

This represents a serious security failure that requires a thorough investigation and accountability. The Royal Australian Air Force and those responsible for the shipment must explain how such a sensitive component was allowed to be sent to Hong Kong and whether it was exposed to unauthorized access.

If U.S.-controlled technology was compromised as a result, there should be serious consequences and appropriate compensation for any resulting damage.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS77tinWQAA3VvZ?format=png&name=small

For decades, China’s state security and intelligence services have sought info about sensitive U.S. military technologies associated with the low-observable characteristics of windshield and canopy of 5th Generation fighter jets.

Now, Australia has potentially handed China this… pic.twitter.com/bGqU9IPOSa

Babak Taghvaee - The Crisis Watch  (@BabakTaghvaee1) September 23, 2026

Originally Posted By Prime:
Large-scale Russian ballistic missile attack on Kyiv.

At least 20 missiles of various types (Iskander-M, RM-48U S-400, Kn-23, Oniks-M, Zircon) were launched, all of which targeted Kyiv.

Strikes were carried out on various different parts of the city, including the southeastern, eastern, western, and northwestern suburbs, resulting in fires breaking out.

Large-scale Russian ballistic missile attack on Kyiv.

At least 20 missiles of various types (Iskander-M, RM-48U S-400, Kn-23, Oniks-M, Zircon) were launched, all of which targeted Kyiv.

Strikes were carried out on various different parts of the city, including the southeastern,… pic.twitter.com/xG7rRYMXxb

— AMK Mapping \uD83C\uDDF3\uD83C\uDDFF (@AMK_Mapping_) September 24, 2026

Today, the Russians launched a ballistic missile strike on Kyiv just as we were meeting with members of Congress and discussing the Lindsey Graham law and the need to strengthen sanctions. Russia will not end this war without pressure. As people were sleeping, flashes from explosions lit up the sky. Once again, the main targets of their strike were Kyiv and civilian infrastructure, residential buildings, a maternity hospital, energy infrastructure, and logistics. Two people have already been reported killed. My condolences to the family and loved ones. There are also people who have been injured. Emergency services are working – people are trapped in one of the buildings. The air raid threat persists in some regions of the country.

We discussed exactly how to protect against these threats with @RepBrianFitz, @RepMikeQuigley, @RepMarcyKaptur, @RepGolden, @RepJoeWilson, and @RepGregoryMeeks. Every such attack happens because the pressure on the aggressor has never become total, and Russia believes it can continue to bet on ballistic terror. Right now, the United States has an opportunity to respond strongly. We need ballistic missile interceptors to protect lives. Sanctions against Russia and those helping it make money must be implemented. I thank both parties for their readiness to help protect lives.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS8MfKlXcAAjYCB?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS8MfKhWgAAQ8U9?format=jpg&name=large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS8MfKcWAAAffqD?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS8MfKYWgAAfLJx?format=jpg&name=large

Today, the Russians launched a ballistic missile strike on Kyiv just as we were meeting with members of Congress and discussing the Lindsey Graham law and the need to strengthen sanctions. Russia will not end this war without pressure. As people were sleeping, flashes from… pic.twitter.com/VocAQIjaB9

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / ????????? ?????????? (@ZelenskyyUa) September 24, 2026

Approximate flight routes of the missiles launched in tonight's combined missile attack on Kyiv.

The following was launched:

~6 Iskander-M ballistic missiles launched from near Klintsy, Bryansk Oblast.

~4 RM-48U modified S-400 ballistic missiles launched from near Klintsy, Bryansk Oblast.

~4 Kn-23 ballistic missiles launched from near Liski, Voronezh Oblast, and near Fatezh, Kursk Oblast.

~4 Oniks-M supersonic cruise missiles launched from near Zheleznogorsk, Kursk Oblast.

~2 Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles launched from near Millerovo, Rostov Oblast.

As of the time of writing, a *minimum* of 2 Oniks-Ms, 1 Iskander-M, and 2 RM-48U S-400s were shot down by Ukrainian air defence.

Note: these numbers may be adjusted in the coming hours as new information comes in. They are only early estimations.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS8sycqbcAAA1M7?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Approximate flight routes of the missiles launched in tonight's combined missile attack on Kyiv.

The following was launched:

~6 Iskander-M ballistic missiles launched from near Klintsy, Bryansk Oblast.

~4 RM-48U modified S-400 ballistic missiles launched from near Klintsy,… pic.twitter.com/1QyXsBf2Iv

— AMK Mapping \uD83C\uDDF3\uD83C\uDDFF (@AMK_Mapping_) September 24, 2026

Originally Posted By Saltwater-Hillbilly:


...going forward we have to assume the Governments of Canada, New Zealand, and Canada, as well as our own "Prime" defense contractors, are deeply compromised by Chinese Intelligence (provided we were either naive or willfully ignorant enough to believe otherwise prior to this).

Originally Posted By Prime:
Rodion Kudryashov, a Ukrainian colonel and deputy commander of the Third Army Corps, has written what I consider an extremely important column examining some of the lessons of the Vivaldi offensive operation.

I put together a summary of the key points:

• In war, it is assault troops — infantry — who actually retake territory, but the conditions that make this possible are created long before they take their first step forward.

• An offensive does not begin when the infantry receives the order to advance. It begins much earlier: with headquarters, commanders, personnel training, logistics, intelligence, unmanned systems, sustainment, and dozens of decisions, most of which never make the news.

• The Third Army Corps spent more than six months preparing for Operation Vivaldi. When the corps assumed responsibility for the sector, its first task was to stop the deterioration of the situation and stabilize the forward line.

• You cannot plan a complex operation if you do not know where your front line will be tomorrow. In such a situation, logistics remain under constant threat, while assembling a strike force becomes extremely difficult.

• A commander must be responsible for the entire cycle — from preparing the individual soldier to achieving results on the battlefield.

• A modern commander must process an enormous flow of information, make decisions quickly, understand the capabilities of systems, logistics, intelligence, and adjacent units, while at the same time avoiding the suppression of initiative at lower levels.

• An army in which every decision spends hours moving up and down the chain of command will lose to an army that can complete the same process in minutes.

• Russia has more manpower, more resources, and a significantly larger industrial base. That means a “unit versus unit” model cannot serve as a long-term strategy for Ukraine. Every unit of Ukrainian resources must produce a greater effect.

• Everything cannot be reduced to technology: even ten thousand drones will not create an advantage by themselves if there is no effective command-and-control system behind them.

• If a junior commander sees the situation changing but has to go through five levels of approval before reacting, the enemy may simply be faster. Sometimes a few minutes matter far more than one additional piece of equipment.

• Flexible command is not just a nice phrase from a military textbook. It can be measured very simply: how much time passes between the emergence of a problem and its solution.

• The corps invested not only in equipment, but also in NCOs, officers, staff training, lessons learned, intelligence organization, and planning.

• The corps began retaking territory and conducting offensive operations after it learned how to win time — the time between identifying a problem and deciding on a solution, between the decision and the action, and between detecting a target and striking it.

• What matters is the system and the command culture: competence must matter more than formal seniority; a strong NCO corps is essential; headquarters must be capable of planning rather than merely transmitting orders; technology must be integrated into a unified system; and logistics must be planned as part of the battle rather than treated as a supporting function.

• Most importantly, the goal is to create an environment in which, after every successful or unsuccessful action, one simple question is asked: what can we learn from this today that will make the entire system stronger tomorrow?

• Winning one battle is not the same as winning the war. The enemy is also learning, changing its tactics, looking for weaknesses, and trying to scale whatever works.

• The colonel ends with a reminder that “Vivaldi” has four seasons. So far, only part of this composition has been heard publicly. The task is to make sure that after Ukraine’s “Vivaldi,” the Russian army increasingly hears Mozart’s “Requiem.”

https://pravda.com.ua/columns/2026/09/23/8054746/

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HS7MbajWYAEaBQ4?format=jpg&name=large

Rodion Kudryashov, a Ukrainian colonel and deputy commander of the Third Army Corps, has written what I consider an extremely important column examining some of the lessons of the Vivaldi offensive operation.

I put together a summary of the key points:

• In war, it is assault… pic.twitter.com/65OSW8YqYX

Yigal Levin  (@YigalLevin) September 23, 2026

Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu:

I assume that any offending parties can be extradited to the US for trial under our laws? After their domestic governments do the same?

Probably, that is wishful thinking. Our top tech is migrating to China, and nothing will be done about it.

Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad:


We haven’t paid enough attention to artillery since drones dominated the news, last I heard global pro-Ukrainian ammo, spare parts, and gun manufacture expansion was starting to close the wide gap of the early war and approach parity, producing a few isolated cases of battlefield superiority.  What is the current balance of firepower and trend line?

Originally Posted By 15fanatic:


Its interesting you barely hear about artillery anymore whereas 3 years ago everyone thought that was going to decide the outcome of the war. Things changed fast!
....
I know Europe makes a massive amount of shells nowadays so I don't think ukraine is at any risk of running low like they were but I could be wrong.

Originally Posted By doc540:

Everyone that thinks this was a mistake wink your left eye.

Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad:


We haven’t paid enough attention to artillery since drones dominated the news, last I heard global pro-Ukrainian ammo, spare parts, and gun manufacture expansion was starting to close the wide gap of the early war and approach parity, producing a few isolated cases of battlefield superiority.  What is the current balance of firepower and trend line?

Originally Posted By uxb:


I am amazed at the number of Chinese nationals working at Los Alamos  

Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER:

Are you suggesting it was a US Op to "give" China some poisoned tech? It's possible but I dont think the package was misrouted by accident and Im sure the Chinese would be suspicious if they were not the ones to compromise the shipper and reroute the package.

Originally Posted By 15fanatic:
More details about the F-35 parts shipment. I hope parts like radars and jammers aren't shipped this way. I doubt what they got is that big of a deal... but it makes you wonder how often this happens that we never hear about. Hopefully some changes are made so this never happens again.

And if its true they used a blacklisted company, someone needs to go to prison.

F-35 freight provider partnered with blacklisted Chinese company - Australian Defence Magazine

"Defence Minister Richard Marles said on Tuesday that the missing parts are ‘not sensitive’, although prior generations of radar-resistant canopy materials, such as gold film used to…

— AvScanNZ \uD83C\uDDF3\uD83C\uDDFF (@NZ_Trav) September 24, 2026

F-35 freight provider partnered with blacklisted Chinese company - Australian Defence Magazine

"Defence Minister Richard Marles said on Tuesday that the missing parts are ‘not sensitive’, although prior generations of radar-resistant canopy materials, such as gold film used to reduce the canopy radar signature on older generations of fighter jets, were classified.

According to The Nightly, citing unnamed defence industry figures, the intermediary company involved in shipping the parts on behalf of jet manufacturer Lockheed Martin was CEVA Logistics. However Bloomberg, citing people briefed on the incident, has reported the carrier was UPS.

CEVA Logistics, which has previously transported F-35 parts, operates storage facilities at RAAF Base Williamtown, where Australian F-35s are serviced, and is a fully owned subsidiary of CMA CGM Group, a French logistics company. It is not clear whether the missing parts were shipped from Williamtown.

Approximately one third of CMA CGM Group’s operating revenue comes from China, according to comments made by the CMA GGM chairman in a meeting with the Chinese consul in Marseille last year, as cited by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on its website.

On August 28, CMA CGM signed a strategic framework agreement with China Communications Construction Company (CCCC), which is owned by the Chinese government."

Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad:
Double agents happen, or the US could have learned there was a plot in development and planted misleading tech.  But I agree this smells of cope, that's a Mossad level play, not CIA minor leagues.

Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER:

100% this.
It is VERY ironic to call people fighting for sovereignty "nazis"

Originally Posted By Haub:

I'd encourage everyone to read the Danish military intelligence assessment in full, and not rely on excitable social media upsums.

Here is the top line: "The Danish Defence Intelligence Service (DDIS) assesses that Russia will intensify its hybrid war by carrying out more… pic.twitter.com/cbKFUDEB5q

Michael Weiss  (@michaeldweiss) September 24, 2026

Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER:

So "Lao Che Air Freight" was the subcontractor...

Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu:

That's what I've been saying. Russia will attack a NATO nation IF Putin believes US/NATO won't respond forcefully.

I would hope (and I'm most likely quite wrong again) that the CIA director told the Muscovites when he visited that any aggression against a NATO state will lead to the immediate and permanent loss of the Kaliningrad exclave and a trade embargo that would include Rosatom (still unsanctioned).

Originally Posted By Longshore87:
Let’s not forget that the attacked country’s request or consent is a required condition under NATO’s stated process for Article 5.  So if Romania, Poland etc… get hit with a missile or drones they have to request or consent to Article 5.  Good chance they don’t if it’s a small strike against them.   Just look at how Poland is evacuating border crossings with Ukraine right now today.

Originally Posted By borderpatrol:
Every nation reserves the right to defend itself, with or without Article 5. Suffering a devastating outcome in response to a cross-border raid is the best defense against trying another.

Originally Posted By stone-age:


The Kremlin keeps framing it this way. If I was a soldier in Ukraine it definitely would cross my mind to fly a flag or symbol that basically says to the Russians " I am the nightmare you fear."

Originally Posted By blueballs:



Indeed..  The interesting part is the Russian perspective.  They frame it in a WW2 perspective where the Nazis, nationalist socialist, invaded mother Russia who considered themselves globalist socialists.  So this angle reminisces about Russian struggle and eventual victory over the Nazis.  In listening to Russian propaganda they tie in current day "Nazis" as nationalists who oppose righteous global Russian conquest. So in current terms, a "Nazis" is a nationalist who does not want their nation under Russian control.  Hence, Ukrainians who don't want to be conquered by Russia are "Nazis".  Amazingly, a significant percentage of westerners who lack even the most basic level of critical thinking actually believe that Ukraine is being run by actual goose stepping WW2 era Nazis.

Originally Posted By Longshore87:


No you are still not correct.  Try reading the whole article and what the tweet purposely left out.

“CEVA Logistics has not been contacted by any customer, regulator, audit agency, or government authority concerning these alleged activities. We are not aware of any facts indicating that CEVA Logistics had any involvement in the matter described.”

Yet we know UPS disclosed the incident to the US State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, which enforces export control laws.

Originally Posted By blueballs:



Hence we have seen some Uke's painting swastikas etc on their vehicles.  It's bad optics as it gets posted as actual evidence that the Ukes are actual Nazis to useful idiots in the west who then shit post social media and forums like this.