Unremarkable Exam

Emergency medicine provider. Veteran. Fan of numbers, facts, and data. Petter of dogs. Heinlein fan. Slow runner, bad at weight lifting, worse at jiu jitsu.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@PermalostLT Valid points across the board.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@tradesidious Well written. I can only imagine that partnerships we have seen recently between Iran and Russia/China have further bolstered these capabilities. Esp the fentanyl piece, but I can only imagine precursors for a variety of agents.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

Given the partnerships between the CCP/Russia and Iran of late, this is not only very possible, but also very alarming.

[Unlimited Powa @tradesidious]

Everyone is focused on Iran's nuclear program.

Nobody is talking about the chemical and biological weapons program.

The evidence is public. The sources are official. And the question nobody is asking could be the most important one of this entire war.

A thread.

[Fox News @FoxNews]

Far-left group with foreign ties undermining US under guise of protest, report warns https://t.co/J5Dg0rAFtO

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

If it walks like a CCP op, and talks like a CCP op, it’s a…

[End Wokeness @EndWokeness]

Rep. Gene Wu (D) goes mask off:

"Non-whites share the same oppressor and we are the majority now. We can take over this country."

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

It’s another 2 weeks or so until the end of the games. This is the first full day and already this.

[Visegrád 24 @visegrad24]

BREAKING:

Huge critical infrastructure sabotage in Italy tonight with coordinated attacks against the railway network.

A bomb was found near Bologna, railway cables have been cut & relay cabinets have been set on fire along Bologna–Padua, Bologna–Ancona & Ancona–Rimini lines.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

It would seem as though there is some real smoke to this. China may be a great power, but it’s held together with chicken wire and duct tape when you look closely.

[Visioner @visionergeo]

‼️‼️‼️🇨🇳 BREAKING - According to sources cited by Reuters and Bloomberg, reports are circulating that an attempted military coup took place in China aimed at overthrowing Xi Jinping. Two key generals have reportedly been detained, along with their families and up to 3,000 military personnel.

➡️ What is known at this stage:

📌 Zhang Youxia (Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission) is suspected of organizing the coup against Xi Jinping.

📌 A shooting reportedly occurred between troops loyal to Zhang and the presidential security detail, resulting in several of Xi Jinping’s guards being wounded or killed.

📌 The plans of Zhang Youxia and the Chief of the Joint Staff, Liu Zhenli, allegedly included mobilizing troops to carry out a state coup against Xi Jinping.

📌 The intended slogan was: “Save the Party, Save the Nation.”

📌 The plan reportedly collapsed due to an alleged betrayal by individuals from within the inner circle.

📌 Both generals are under strict control and investigator supervision; along with them, their families and up to 3,000 military personnel have reportedly been detained.

📌 Following the exposure of the plan, heightened combat readiness was imposed, troop movements were halted, mobile phones were confiscated, and mass propaganda campaigns were launched.

📌 All these events coincided with Chinese military exercises simulating strikes on Taiwan and the destruction of its governing authorities.

🟦 While China’s Ministry of National Defense of the People's Republic of China has officially confirmed the launch of an investigation into Generals Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli (the official reason cited being “serious violations of discipline and law,” a phrase often associated with corruption), information regarding an actual “attempted military coup” and “shootings” remains unconfirmed at this stage. Such claims are primarily circulating on social media and through opposition media outlets. Western agencies (Reuters, Bloomberg) tend to assess this more as another round of Xi Jinping’s purge of the military elite.

See the latest updates with us: @visionergeo

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@PermalostLT @SheilaInCT @justinamash

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

I think that settles it. This is organized. This gives off an information operation vibe. And it certainly is having IO destabilization-type effects.

[Michael Shellenberger @shellenberger]

This is the manual instructing people on how to interfere with law enforcement operations

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

Giving up strategic resources is always going to be a bad idea. The Diego Garcia/Chagos Islands situation doesn’t get talked about nearly enough.

[Tony Seruga @TonySeruga]

🚨Just as Vital to U.S. National Security, Whoever Narrates and Networks the Indian Ocean Will Rule the 21st Century

Attention: @realDonaldTrump @POTUS @JDVance @VP @marcorubio @SecRubio

The Chagos Islands issue is one of the most underreported yet geopolitically explosive developments in the Indian Ocean, with massive ramifications for Western security, freedom of navigation, and strategic balance in the Indo‑Pacific.

🇬🇧⚖️ Background: Strategic Importance of Chagos

The Chagos Archipelago, especially the largest atoll Diego Garcia, sits smack in the middle of the Indian Ocean — a perfect surveillance and logistics hub between East Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.

The UK excised the islands from Mauritius in 1965, forming the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), leasing Diego Garcia to the United States.

Since the 1970s, Diego Garcia has served as one of the most critical U.S. military installations outside of the continental United States — hosting long‑range bombers, underwater surveillance systems, and communications facilities that monitor much of the world’s shipping lanes and submarine traffic.

This base is not a mere outpost — it’s the brain stem of Western power projection across the Indian Ocean and a key part of the entire global deterrence architecture.

🇲🇺 The “Return” of Chagos to Mauritius — and the Leverage Game

Over the past few years, Mauritius has mounted a legal and diplomatic campaign, backed aggressively by the China-controlled United Nations and — behind the scenes — by China, to “reclaim” sovereignty over Chagos:

In 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion claiming Britain’s administration of Chagos was “unlawful” and should end “as rapidly as possible.”

In 2021‑2023, the (CCP compromised) UN General Assembly passed resolutions instructing member states to recognize Mauritian sovereignty.

The Biden administration and the UK began talks in 2022–2024 on “resolving” sovereignty, with Mauritius promising that the U.S. base would continue to operate — but this is the bait, not the deal.

The real game is that once sovereignty formally transfers, Mauritius — deeply indebted to Chinese development loans and dependent on Beijing for port and infrastructure financing — will be under intense Chinese leverage.

🇨🇳 Enter China: The Trojan Horse of "Development Assistance"

China has not hidden its interest in strategic access points under the guise of “dual‑use port development,” “renewable energy projects,” or “maritime cooperation.”

Pattern recognition confirms the reality:

Sri Lanka: Hambantota Port seized under a 99‑year lease after debt default.

Pakistan: Gwadar Port is now effectively run by Chinese military logistics units.

Djibouti: “Commercial” port became China’s first overseas military base.

Solomon Islands: “Security agreement” opening the door to Chinese naval presence.

Now, Mauritius‑Chagos is the next domino. Reports from early 2025 suggest that Mauritius granted China exploratory access for “infrastructure cooperation” at Peros Banhos Atoll — almost certainly meaning dual‑use port and airstrip facilities for the PLA Navy and Air Force.

🚨 The National Security Risk

If China establishes even a nominal presence in the Chagos Archipelago:

1. Surveillance Over Diego Garcia – A Chinese outpost could place the U.S. and British base within SIGINT and radar coverage, undermining the core operational secrecy of Western deployments.

2. Control of Sea Lanes – The Indian Ocean carries ~60% of global oil shipments and ~40% of global trade. A Chinese base there would allow Beijing to choke Western trade routes in a conflict.

3. Encirclement Strategy – Combined with East African port acquisitions and the Djibouti base, this forms a strategic noose around India and Western naval power in the region.

4. Espionage & Communications Risks – Given China’s record of embedding surveillance in telecom, port, and satellite infrastructures, any Chinese installation in Mauritius or Chagos would compromise undersea cable integrity and satellite tracking.

5. Erosion of the Anglosphere’s Command Chain – Diego Garcia links to Guam, Hawaii, and British facilities at Ascension and Cyprus — nodes of the secure U.S. global C4ISR structure (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance). A Chinese presence disrupts the lattice.

In short: this isn’t just sovereignty politics — it’s the rusting hinge of the entire Western strategic architecture.

🧩 Deeper Context: Western Strategic Apathy

Why did this happen? A few key failures:

UK complacency — decades of bureaucratic drift, assuming no one would ever challenge BIOT sovereignty.

U.S. distraction — overcentralized focus on the South China Sea and Taiwan, ignoring the Indo‑Western flank.

International law weaponization — China using the UN system (once Western-managed) to advance its own geostrategic goals.

Corporate capture of policy — Western elites view Mauritian “joint development” schemes through the lens of global capital interests, not defense.

In plain terms: the Empire of Bureaucrats has slipped into a coma, while a rival civilization with long vision and no moral hesitation is quietly taking the chessboard.

💡 Bottom Line

The Chagos “deal” is not an innocent decolonization correction — it is a geopolitical trap, engineered through financial dependence and legal warfare, enabling China’s next military foothold in one of the world’s most vital maritime choke points.

A single Chinese base there would:

Undermine the U.S.–UK security umbrella in the Indian Ocean

Threaten India’s southern flank

And, most importantly, fracture the continuity of Western global projection from Diego Garcia eastward

This is a generational failure of strategic foresight — one that will haunt the West for decades unless decisively reversed.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@romanhelmetguy @jockowillink Sometimes I forget Jocko has a BA in English.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

Very interesting deep dive on the Muslim Brotherhood and its network/component organizations.

[DisInfo Lab @DisinfoLab]

The US President Donald Trump directed that the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) be reviewed for designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation. But MB still operates freely globally. The message reads less like policy and more like a warning to the world: this network isn’t small.

🧵

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@Wild_Arms_RandD People are suddenly understanding that surrendering to a drone is a complicated idea on a good day. Like that hasn’t been talked about for the last ~3yrs.
https://t.co/WMNGItAwSJ

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

I am definitely not an expert on the LOAC. Frankly, I’m more familiar with hors d'oeuvres than I am with hors de combat, and I’m okay with that.
It seems to me like one of the challenging things people are faced with these days touches on what Dr. Cox touches on; the feasibility of accepting surrender with drones.
This doesn’t seem like an issue we are having just now. I recall Ryan McBeth has written a substack on it but also the Lieber Institute at USMA has touched on it (https://t.co/7362XpyjO3) as has U Chicago (https://t.co/qwBcIAP2md) as this same topic has been a thing they have been trying to figure out in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
I have my opinions for sure given my experiences in GWOT. And I can’t read what other people write on the subject. And while I don’t have all the answers, it does seem like a common theme is that our technology seems to have outpaced the rules we currently have.
This may well be just another case amongst many that highlights that we need to figure this out sooner than later because the problem isn’t going away.
My two cents anyway.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@TheRealCruzOx It’s the endeavor of every coach to leave a mark on a program. Typically they just go for a different mark.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

@blauvelt_ @honestpollster Thanks!

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

I am definitely not an expert on the LOAC. Frankly, I’m more familiar with hors d'oeuvres than I am with hors de combat, and I’m okay with that.
It seems to me like one of the challenging things people are faced with these days touches on what Dr. Cox touches on; the feasibility of accepting surrender with drones.
This doesn’t seem like an issue we are having just now. I recall Ryan McBeth has written a substack on it but also the Lieber Institute at USMA has touched on it (https://t.co/7362XpyjO3) as has U Chicago (https://t.co/qwBcIAP2md) as this same topic has been a thing they have been trying to figure out in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
I have my opinions for sure given my experiences in GWOT. And I can’t read what other people write on the subject. And while I don’t have all the answers, it does seem like a common theme is that our technology seems to have outpaced the rules we currently have.
This may well be just another case amongst many that highlights that we need to figure this out sooner than later because the problem isn’t going away.
My two cents anyway.

[Dr. Brian L. Cox @BrianCox_RLTW]

🚨 CALLING ALL JOURNALISTS

Listen up. The further I progress in j school, the less patience I have for journalistic malpractice when covering int'l law involving armed conflict in our media coverage. Take this story @CNN by @NatashaBertrand for example.

For now, I'll focus on ONE specific #LOAC issue covered in this story since Natasha also addresses it in QTd post: when a person qualifies as "hors de combat" - or out of the fight due to sickness, illness, injury, or detention.

According to anonymous sources in connected stories @washingtonpost & @theintercept, operators @Southcom & @SOCSOUTH attacked 2 suspected narco-terrorists somewhere in open waters of the Caribbean who survived an initial strike on their boat. This is sometimes referred to colloquially as a "double tap" attack & it was supposedly a response to guidance from @SecWar @PeteHegseth to "kill everyone."

Natasha seeks commentary from Sarah Harrison @CrisisGroup, who claims it's unlawful pursuant to #LOAC to attack somebody who "is ‘hors de combat’ and no longer able to fight, then they have to be treated humanely." Natasha reiterates this claim using slightly different language in her post @X QTd here.

Here's the thing: both source & journalist are wrong. And confirming this is as easy as opening the latest edition of DoD Law of War Manual & searching for "hors de combat".

If journalists did so, they would encounter plenty of material confirming Harrison's characterization of int'l law - and those who express similar commentary - is incorrect. But don't just take my word for it: read the attached excerpts of the Manual for yourself (highlights added for emphasis).

The common theme among these excerpts can be summarized by one simple phrase: a person is only rendered hors de combat "under circumstances where it is feasible for the opposing party to accept the surrender." Any guesses what these anonymous sources at the center of this whole media frenzy fail to establish?

That's right! That it was feasible to accept the surrender of these suspected narco-terrorists under the circumstances on the high seas.

If it was not, then the suspected civilians taking direct part in hostilities were NOT hors de combat. Period.

Now, if a reporter were engaged in balanced & informed journalism, s/he would do some research to discover this standard so they can at least ensure their source addresses it. In this case, it might sound something like this during the interview:

"Ms. Harrison, you said somebody who is 'hors de combat and no longer able to fight, then they have to be treated humanely,' but are you able to determine whether US military forces were able to accept the surrender of the people on or near the boat under the circumstances at the time? If so, what is the source of this factual knowledge? And if you are not able to confirm the circumstances, how does this impact your claim that this 'double tap' strike violated LOAC?"

As a reader, think about how much answers to these questions might influence your understanding of the (un?)lawfulness of this reported strike. Yet, this context isn't presented to you because the person writing the story - the journalist - doesn't understand the body of law she's reporting to you.

And here's the thing. It's not just Natasha Bertrand or CNN or this one article or this one issue in the article. This professional #journalisticmalpractice manifests almost every time journalists report on int'l law involving armed conflict, for similar reasons as those addressed above.

Think about how often this body of law is addressed in news coverage. Getting it wrong on 1 issue in 1 article is bad enough. For this to happen nearly every time media covers applied LOAC creates a global pandemic of misinformation.

Quite simply, standards actually being applied in practice aren't consistent with expectations created by media coverage.

The lesson is simple & clear: do better. We owe it to our audience to find ways to get LOAC right.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

If you’re going to run an information operation that adheres to a strict pattern, perhaps don’t make it quite as on the nose.

[Ryan Goodman @rgoodlaw]

Former US military lawyers speak out

"The Former JAGs Working Group unanimously considers both the giving and the execution of these orders, if true, to constitute war crimes, murder, or both"

Statement on Media Reports of Pentagon “No Quarter” Orders in Caribbean Boat Strikes

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

Every part of this is correct.
What we are dealing with is a well coordinated information operation as you would see in a Color Revolution. The people involved in this are not stupid or inexperienced, they know precisely what they are doing, they are just hoping they can be louder than those pointing it out.

[Unremarkable Exam @UnremarkExm]

People really need to understand Color Revolutions. Given that we are on one side of them, I don’t know how often we think of how to address them. The Center for Strategic Translation has an interesting substack titled “How to Stop a Color Revolution: A User Manual” that talks about a CCP’s analysis of Color Revolutions in their National Security Paradigm. The Paradigm is definitely worth the read for those wanting to learn more (https://t.co/HbW8NtXVZ2)

[Cynical Publius @CynicalPublius]

Funny how all these Deep State, Color Revolution cretins are posting the exact same lies at the exact same time using the exact same words.

Looks like the Soros Color Revolution Command Post has sent out its order of the day.

It's a childish attempt to fabricate an obviously fake story in an effort to make us all forget about the crimes of the Seditious 6.

It ain't working.