Mike Fitzpatrick

For Wolverine Fans From Coast to Coast

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@mark_slapinski This aligns with ongoing disputes , no deal has been broken, but both sides accuse the other of violations.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@Tablesalt13 Ya…remind the son of Castro that when The US forces Canada to pay more than their annual 2.9pct towards North American defense their free health care and “cheap aluminum” will be worthless.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@canada_northman @sarobertsonca Keeping in mind Canadians only have state sponsored and controlled media that doesn’t report the facts to you.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

Facts easily attainable. Burden-sharing analysis (Solomon & Fetterly, 2023/2024 paper): The US shoulders ~97.6% of the North American defense burden (costs) but receives only ~64% of the benefits. Canada contributes ~2–2.4% of costs but enjoys ~9–36% of benefits (depending on whether Canada’s vast territory/coastline is factored in). This implies a substantial net US subsidy via shared continental defense.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

Not true. Global payments: The yuan ranks 5th–6th in SWIFT data, with a share of ~2.7–3.17% of global payments by value (dollar dominates at ~40%+). 
• Trade finance: Yuan’s share has quadrupled in recent years to ~7–8% globally (second behind the dollar at ~80%), making it a growing alternative in financing, especially for China-linked deals. 
• Global reserves: RMB accounts for only ~1.9–2.1% of allocated foreign exchange reserves (IMF data). Dollar holds ~56–58%, euro ~20%. Central banks show limited appetite for large shifts due to China’s capital controls and limited convertibility.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

He owns China right now via Iran. If you can’t see that…you are geopolitically illiterate! China needs oil…Trump in less than 4 months has cut their supplies by 40 pct…or more. Open your eyes…China will make sure Iran signs on the dotted lines. They aren’t sacrificing their future for Tehran.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@Geoff00102 @cenkuygur Which because of poor infrastructure has virtually never been utilized. Oil is the only export that matters to them. It has to by by sea.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

If you can’t sell it or move it your product ain’t leverage. Look at the map…Iran as a country has just been walled up with no other import/export route. Best option is for their benefactors in Beijing to tell them game over. Thats the real end game geopolitically. To have China by the balls. First Venezuela, now Iran. China is the loser and that’s what this is predominantly about.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

You haven’t paid attention. China is well aware of the situation and wants Iran to capitulate. They have no leverage, but The Mullahs don’t care. Power and terror is all they know. Trump speaks their language. An American President who won’t capitulate to despots. Obama should get full credit for it reaching this point. He empowered Iran to continue on the nuclear path and paid for them to do it. It’s about to get even more real!

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@donaldguy2 @cenkuygur Man…do you get your news from Tehran? That game has just come to an abrupt end!

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

Why Europe remains profoundly in trouble without the US:
The core issue is not raw counts—it’s enablers, integration, readiness, logistics, and industrial depth for high-intensity war against a peer like Russia.
• Strategic enablers gap: US provides the bulk of ISR (intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance), strategic airlift/sealift, aerial refueling, SEAD/DEAD (suppression of enemy air defenses), ballistic missile defense, and secure C2 networks. Europe lacks sufficient scale here; national forces often can’t fuse or sustain operations across borders without US backbone.
• Logistics & sustainability: Moving/sustaining large forces (ammo, fuel, spares) over distance in contested environments is a US specialty. Europe has fragmented supply chains, low munitions stocks (exposed in Ukraine aid), and limited heavy lift. A prolonged fight risks rapid attrition.
• Command/integration: NATO’s integrated command is US-led in practice. Europe’s “joint commands” are embryonic; political coordination among 30+ nations (varying threat perceptions, languages, doctrines) slows decisions. No single European nuclear umbrella fully replaces US extended deterrence.
• Readiness & depth: Many European forces have low availability rates, hollowed logistics, and peacetime structures. Artillery/aircraft numbers sound good, but sortie rates, maintenance, and experienced crews lag. Russia has combat-hardened forces and massive production ramp-up.
• Industrial base: Europe buys heavily from the US (or off-the-shelf). Scaling domestic production takes years; the ReArm plan pushes “buy European,” but fragmentation persists. Replacing US-scale output quickly is unrealistic without massive, sustained investment.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and analysts have bluntly stated Europe cannot yet defend itself solo against a determined Russia—losing the US nuclear umbrella and enablers would be a severe shock. Trump-era pressure has usefully forced spending hikes, but pretending the list erases dependencies ignores decades of free-riding and capability shortfalls.
The “helpless Europe” narrative had truth in chronic underinvestment. The dependency critique has merit too (US bearing ~60%+ of NATO spending historically, plus tech/intel). Europe can and should do far more independently—Trump accelerated that reality check—but claiming it’s already solved risks dangerous complacency. Full autonomy requires not just more hardware, but years of painful integration, procurement reform, and political will that has historically been lacking.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

Reality Check. Why Europe remains profoundly in trouble without the US:
The core issue is not raw counts—it’s enablers, integration, readiness, logistics, and industrial depth for high-intensity war against a peer like Russia.
• Strategic enablers gap: US provides the bulk of ISR (intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance), strategic airlift/sealift, aerial refueling, SEAD/DEAD (suppression of enemy air defenses), ballistic missile defense, and secure C2 networks. Europe lacks sufficient scale here; national forces often can’t fuse or sustain operations across borders without US backbone. 
• Logistics & sustainability: Moving/sustaining large forces (ammo, fuel, spares) over distance in contested environments is a US specialty. Europe has fragmented supply chains, low munitions stocks (exposed in Ukraine aid), and limited heavy lift. A prolonged fight risks rapid attrition.
• Command/integration: NATO’s integrated command is US-led in practice. Europe’s “joint commands” are embryonic; political coordination among 30+ nations (varying threat perceptions, languages, doctrines) slows decisions. No single European nuclear umbrella fully replaces US extended deterrence.
• Readiness & depth: Many European forces have low availability rates, hollowed logistics, and peacetime structures. Artillery/aircraft numbers sound good, but sortie rates, maintenance, and experienced crews lag. Russia has combat-hardened forces and massive production ramp-up.
• Industrial base: Europe buys heavily from the US (or off-the-shelf). Scaling domestic production takes years; the ReArm plan pushes “buy European,” but fragmentation persists. Replacing US-scale output quickly is unrealistic without massive, sustained investment.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and analysts have bluntly stated Europe cannot yet defend itself solo against a determined Russia—losing the US nuclear umbrella and enablers would be a severe shock.  Trump-era pressure has usefully forced spending hikes, but pretending the list erases dependencies ignores decades of free-riding and capability shortfalls.
The “helpless Europe” narrative had truth in chronic underinvestment. The dependency critique has merit too (US bearing ~60%+ of NATO spending historically, plus tech/intel). Europe can and should do far more independently—Trump accelerated that reality check—but claiming it’s already solved risks dangerous complacency. Full autonomy requires not just more hardware, but years of painful integration, procurement reform, and political will that has historically been lacking.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

https://t.co/b7sgOFwWch

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@FurkanGozukara There is no such thing as an International framework. If there is it’s a framework of failure , such as The EU and Canada.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

@Smil3yAngel FYI - Good Friday is a holiday in pagan nations. It is a Holy Day in Christian nations.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

The old world order and The British banking system are crumbling. NATO will soon be without their benefactor. Yes…Carney has done a lot! He’s tied Canada to a sinking ship . The brutal reality for Canada and The EU is that they have zero leverage. The new Group of 5 Nations does not include them. You are not a player in the new world.

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

https://t.co/qIgfYCDQ0j

[Mike Fitzpatrick @TheMichiganMan]

Catholic Me - Mass Reflection, Spirituality & Much More https://t.co/S4KTePuoet