Per P. Manejr

A 50ish dad in the frontlines of the daily grind. ☕️ Sharing field notes on marriage, parenting, work, life, and how to stay human.

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

This is extraordinarily rare.

In fact, according to a key figure in the German business community (who is a dear friend of mine), it's unprecedented.

An op-ed, two pages, centerpiece, in Germany’s most important economic newspaper (the Handelsblatt) that begs the German establishment to stop looking at China via the prism of propaganda. And it's by their Shanghai bureau chief - not some outside contributor.

The title is "The China debate cannot continue like this!" and the article makes the case that it's suicidal, from a German and European standpoint, to keep reducing China to false caricatures rather than facts.

In effect it's rubbish in, rubbish out: if you tell people lies about China - whichever direction they go (anti or pro) - then obviously the policies that come out will be rubbish, designed for a mirage of a country that exists only in people's imagination.

Needless to say, this is absolutely music to my ears because it's literally the main point I've been making in my advocacy around China for now almost 10 years. Some are finally seeing the light...

I also believe, as I argued in my article "Are Western media turning China-friendly?" last year (https://t.co/Xg1hoSRtNy) that this type of coverage was bound to happen, and there will be more and more of it.

Why? For a very simple structural reason: China is now too powerful to coerce. The West, and Europe in particular, just don't have the leverage anymore. Which means that if you tell China to do something and they don't want to, they just won't do it. Period.

In this situation, incapable of coercing, your only remaining choice is... convincing. And what do you need if you want to convince someone? Well, you need to understand them: understand how they think, how they behave, what drives them, what they actually want.

In other words: the moment coercion stops being an option, not only does propaganda stop being useful, it begins to be actively harmful as genuine understand becomes a strategic necessity. Reality is finally becoming profitable again.

Which means, if you're a journalist reading this and you're peddling some of your usual lies, describing China as some sort of cartoonish dictatorial dystopia that's simultaneously on the verge of collapse yet a "threat" to the whole world (in short, if you write on China for The Economist or the FT), be on notice: the real threat to your country isn't China. It's you.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@21WIRE @JohnKiriakou Here they are too: https://t.co/wTWHiRten3

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@nxt888 I am a Filipino, your Little Brown Brother. Now being prepared by your Army and Marines to fight our "enemy", the Chinese-our own neighbor, by a "friend" living 11,000 miles away.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@SprinterPress Another unburnt passport, don't I remember where this happened before? 🤔😁

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

MY PUJ DAYS: 1993-1999 🛺

My family was privileged to own one, and I drove a PUJ back in the 90s. The fare in 1993 was just P0.75 (student/senior) and P1.25 (regular). I spent those years balancing university life and driving between classes—studying my textbooks during rest stops.

I made many friends by giving students free rides, and I’d always return the fare to my professors! My advice to the youth: Learn auto mechanics. That 3-month course and 1-month overhauling program I took saved me countless times.

"HABOL NG KALSADA" 🛣️

I lived through the 1997 financial crisis. We call it "chasing the road"—driving just to cover diesel and boundary before you even see a cent of profit.

The Math (Current Rates):

Total Revenue: 300 pax @ P20 = P6,000

Fuel Cost: 30L @ P148/li = (P4,440)

Boundary: = (P800)

Net Profit: P760

If that driver has just 50 fewer passengers? He nets, -P240. That’s "abono" territory when you factor in barker fees, meals, dues, taxes, and maintenance. I do most repairs myself, but many drivers can too.

THE BOTTOM LINE 🇵🇭

The drivers we depend on for our daily commute should be supported by the State. They keep the economy moving and have families to feed. They deserve more than just "surviving" the day.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

I am calling the @TeamAFP to start making arrangements to have your transportation equipment to be used to ferry passengers. These are moments that we need you to protect our livelihoods.

Political desiciveness take time.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

As of April 8, 2026, the United States has provisionally accepted a ten-point proposal from #Iran as a "workable basis" for a definitive peace agreement for the #IranWar‌ .

President Trump announced yesterday (April 7, 2026) that he has suspended planned military strikes against Iranian infrastructure for a period of two weeks to allow for the finalization of this deal. This breakthrough follows a period of intense tension regarding the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and was brokered through mediation by Pakistan.

Status of Acceptance
Workable Basis: The U.S. has not "accepted" the points as a final, signed treaty yet, but has accepted them as the foundation for a "double-sided ceasefire."

The Two-Week Window: The ceasefire is intended to provide space to "consummate" the agreement. Trump stated on Truth Social that "almost all of the various points of past contention have been agreed to."

Key Elements of the 10-Point Proposal
While the full text is being finalized, reports from Xinhua and The Guardian indicate the proposal includes:

1) Ceasefire & Non-Aggression: A formal U.S. commitment to cease hostilities and ensure no further acts of aggression.

2) Strait of Hormuz: Reopening the strait for international shipping, though under "conditional passage" or coordination with Iranian forces.

3) Sanctions Relief: The lifting of both primary and secondary U.S. sanctions.

4) Nuclear Rights: Recognition of Iran's right to domestic nuclear enrichment for peaceful purposes.

5) Regional Presence: Discussions regarding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from certain regional bases.

6. Infrastructure: Compensation or assistance for the reconstruction of infrastructure damaged during recent escalations.

Congratulations, Iran!

Primary News Sources
https://t.co/tlqCnmR0Km

https://t.co/mCEsEJyCq7

https://t.co/tCrcUK6v4N

https://t.co/Jua4HD3Sfx

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

To all #Americans here on X, do you know what is happening in this #IranWar‌ to the Iranian men, women and children? What is your opinion? War crimes are being committed in your names.

https://t.co/XOaMijbglW

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@Still_learner Please and thanks!

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@lunarfq Hey

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@iribnews_irib Persian culture has gone through worse times, and won.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

May their poor souls rest in peace

[Kim Dotcom @KimDotcom]

"We are the terrorists!"
US Intelligence officer

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

In the Foreign Affairs article "The Price of Strategic Incoherence in Iran," authors Richard Betts and Stephen Biddle argue that the United States has entered into a "war of choice" with Iran that lacks a coherent strategy, defined victory conditions, or a viable plan for the aftermath.
The article provides a critical assessment of the conflict, focusing on the following key points:

1. The Strategic Vacuum
The authors contend that the U.S. administration (portrayed in the context of a 2026 conflict) launched military operations without a clear doctrine. They argue that "strategic incoherence" understates the scale of the blunder, as the U.S. has engaged in a high-stakes war without determining what a "win" actually looks like or how to stabilize the region once the fighting stops.

2. Misunderstanding the Enemy
A central critique is the administration’s failure to understand the nature of the Iranian regime.
The IRGC's Resilience: The authors note that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is highly decentralized with sleeper cells across 31 provinces. Killing top leadership in Tehran will not necessarily topple the government or stop the resistance.
Failed Assumptions: The U.S. reportedly assumed that air strikes and the removal of top officials would trigger a popular uprising. Instead, the authors suggest the war may have "given the regime a new life" by fueling nationalism.

3. Comparison to Iraq and Afghanistan
The article draws sobering parallels to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Worse than Iraq: While the Iraq War was a "quagmire" due to a lack of post-war planning, the authors argue the situation in Iran is more dangerous. Iran has a significant geographic advantage, a more sophisticated military (including advanced drone capabilities), and stronger backing from major powers like Russia.
The Proxy Factor: Russia is likely to use the conflict to fight a proxy war against the U.S., potentially supplying the IRGC with data and weapons to destroy American assets.

4. Global Economic and Geopolitical Fallout
The benefits of the war are described as negligible compared to the escalating costs:
Energy Crisis: The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has triggered a global energy crisis. Countries like the Philippines are rationing energy, and the manufacturing of advanced microchips in Taiwan is threatened, which could cripple the U.S. economy.
Diplomatic Isolation: Unlike the 1991 Gulf War or even the 2003 invasion of Iraq, this conflict was initiated without an international coalition or a case presented to the UN Security Council, leaving the U.S. diplomatically isolated.

5. Conclusion: A "Rogue" Gamble
Betts and Biddle conclude that the war is a massive gamble that sacrifices moral standing and material resources for an undefined goal. They warn that the conflict is turning the U.S. into a "rogue superpower" that is destroying the very global order it once sought to lead, all while failing to achieve the primary objective of neutralizing the Iranian threat.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@marryevan999 @grok is this possible?

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@DeadlineDayLive Yes. Slot isn't improving the team performance with the players he has.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@man_of_renown @DanielLDavis1 Including 2 HH-60 Jolly Green helos, that's $2B worth of aircraft

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

@TechElyra Agent

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

It is interesting to look back and reflect on the rather interesting events in antiquity between Rome and Parthia (ancient Iran) with regards to the present US/Israel-Iran War.

If we just focus on warfare alone, the Battle of Carrhae comes to mind, where a smaller Parthian army led by Surena, defeated seven Roman legions led by Crassus and inflicted more humiliation to Rome with the capture of seven standards and 10,000 legionnaires. Crassus' son, Publius, also died in the battle.

The Parthians used their mounted archers to shower the Roman lines with arrows and cataphracts dealt the heavier blows. Take note that the Surena brought camel trains that provided an endless supply of arrows.

Will history repeat, this time risking the US into political turmoil that even the world may not be ready to face? Rome also descended to a civil war between Julius Caesar and Pompey (first Triumvirate) after Crassus' death.

How similar this form of warfare. We see in the news and YouTube streams where US and Israeli missile defenses are no match to the seemingly endless ballistic and hypersonic missiles and drones fired by the present day Iranian army.

Rome under Augustus had a period of peace with the Parthians, but Trump and Netanyahu are not showing any Augustan diplomatic skills to create an offramp from their predicament.

Will we see a new Battle of Carrhae in our time? Will the American public handle the humiliation of defeat of their "superior" army consisting of MEUs, Rangers, SEALS, Airborne Infantry, defeated and mix with the blood of Roman legions of old, in the present Iranian plains and mountains?

It's for the Americans to decide.

[Per P. Manejr @PManejr]

How long does the @DepEd_PH Division Office respond to #childabuse by a #teacher, after filing a notarized Incident Report?