与「oil」相关的搜索结果

Popular TradFi Assets Now on HTX 🚀 Trade US stocks, gold, oil, and global indices all in one place. Track market moves faster and execute trades with ease. US stock futures available on HTX. Wall Street closes, HTX runs 24/7. #HTXEVOLVE#

The CIA’s Post-War Vassalization of Japan Until 1941, Japan carried out these crimes against humanity with the assistance of the United States and Britain. And the pro-Kuomintang China Lobby inside the United States and the Wisemen (John J. McCloy, Dean Acheson, Averell Harriman, etc.) prevented the Roosevelt Administration from even engaging with the Communist Party of China led by Mao Zedong. This was despite the fact that General Joseph Stilwell, Colonel David Barrett, and John S. Service described the People’s Liberation Army as the most effective fighting force against the Japanese Imperial Army, as opposed to Chiang Kai Shek who was more concerned with repressing internal opponents and had zero interest in uniting with the Communist Party to fight against the Japanese occupation, despite the support for a united front from Mao and Stilwell. That year though, the US, Britain and the Netherlands finally decided to take action against Japan for its imperial aggression in China and the Asian continent, imposing crushing oil embargo. It was on that basis that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, bringing the United States into World War II. However, after World War II, John J. McCloy became the President of the World Bank and decided that the new strategy was to once again build up Japan as an opponent to China and the Soviet Union. According to Washington and the US Treasury, the policy was supposed to be that all Asian countries are subservient to a new Japanese empire that was really just a colony of the US. And the role of this new US-led Asian order is that all countries on the continent were to export raw materials to Japan so that they can be turned into manufactured goods. This strongly differed from the approach of US President Ulysses S. Grant who toured Asia after leaving office and advocated for China to lead the way on the continent’s industrial and commercial development. He further emphasized a US-China relationship that is based on mutual respect and explicitly denounced European colonialism. And now newly declassified JFK Files released by the Trump Administration reveal how Japan, through the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, became a permanent US vassal during the Cold War with CIA funding. One document in particular from March 1996 reveals that Washington and Tokyo were still working overtime to hide the existence of the CIA’s Tokyo Station. And their reasoning was the protect this notion that Washington created that Japan was a sovereign state. The US State Department memo was titled “Official Acknowledgement of Tokyo Station” and it shows former US Vice President turned Ambassador to Japan Walter Mondale, along with Japanese officials in Tokyo, in full damage-control mode. Two years before, the New York Times wrote a report exposing secret CIA funding for Japan’s ruling right-wing Liberal Democratic Party during the 1950s and 1960s. Their fear was that if they confirmed the CIA’s presence in Tokyo, it would re-ignite the scandal by confirming the allegations in the NYT’s report. Then-Japanese Foreign Affairs Minister Yohei Kono warned Mondale to keep it secret because the official confirmation would hurt the LDP far more than the NYT’s allegations and threaten the entire post-war security framework between the Washington and Tokyo because it would expose Japan as nothing more than an imperial colony dependent on the United States. Kono had previously claimed, in response to NYT’s allegations, that Japan had “no knowledge” of any organized CIA presence inside the country.

RECAP: -The U.S.-Iran exchange exploded. The U.S. struck Iran again Wednesday and downed Iranian drones. Iran says it fired on four ships in Hormuz, then claimed it hit a U.S. airbase in retaliation. -Kuwait activated its air defenses against "hostile" missile and drone attacks. Likely tied to the IRGC retaliation, since Kuwait hosts major U.S. bases. -Israel escalated hard in Lebanon, striking over 150 Hezbollah sites and issuing evacuation orders for buildings in Tyre. Netanyahu authorized more intense attacks even as the deal is meant to end that war. -Politico says the Pentagon has quietly staged the troops and warships for a Cuba invasion. All it needs is Trump's green light. -AP reports: the Trump administration told Miami prosecutors to stand down on Venezuela's acting president as oil deals flow. Same pause reportedly hit Colombia's Petro. -The Pentagon is in talks to fund U.S. drone makers. The U.S. builds 100,000 drones a year. Ukraine built 4 million. -A Google engineer was charged with using insider company data to win $1.2 million on Polymarket.

Im covered in baby oil and im hard…🧴 I want you to send me vids and pics…🔞 Until my bbc can’t take anymore 😩 #horny# #nsfwtwt# #bnwo# #wc# #gooning# #dickrate# #slut# #wankchat# #wankbattl# #dickpic# #cock# #cocktribute# #goon# #sex#

LATEST: 📊 Glassnode says elevated oil prices, rising yields, and fading ETF demand are keeping BTC pinned near $76K, flagging $78K as the key threshold for a pre-bull transition.

Many point to the “Mediterranean diet”—fish, whole grains, fresh fruit, vegetables and olive oil. Critics, though, point out that diets differ widely from Portugal to Greece

I asked Claude to apply a capital cycle analysis to $MU. Here's what it came up with: Net reading: 11 of 14 capital cycle signals are bearish or strongly bearish. The framework reads this as late-cycle, not early/mid-cycle. The two unambiguously bullish signals (equipment lead times, industry concentration) are eroding rather than strengthening. Insights Yielded by Capital Cycle Analysis: 1) "Structural change" rhetoric is itself diagnostic. The capital cycle framework treats coordinated industry-wide CEO claims of regime change as evidence of late-cycle euphoria. The same language was deployed by the same CEOs (Mehrotra at Micron specifically) in 2017–2018 and was wrong. Bayesian base rates argue against accepting the current claims at face value. The previous analysis under-weighted this base-rate evidence. 2) Look at total capital flowing into the supply curve, not just incumbent capex. The structural-change analysis focused on Big Three capex. The capital cycle lens forces aggregation of all capital flowing into memory output: a) Incumbent capex: ~$104B in 2026 across DRAM + NAND; b) CXMT IPO proceeds: ~$4.2B (with state-aligned co-financing many multiples larger); c) YMTC capacity additions (privately financed) d) Substitute technology capital (Cerebras, photonic startups, CXL controller designers) — billions of dollars of equity raised to reduce HBM intensity per dollar of AI compute deployed. When aggregated, total effective supply-side capital formation in 2026 is materially higher than the Big Three capex alone suggests. The supply response is being underestimated. 3) The customer base is doing exactly what late-cycle customers do. Hyperscalers locking in 3–5 year LTAs, pre-ordering 2027 NAND, building strategic inventory — these are not signs of confident long-cycle visibility, they are signs of late-cycle scarcity panic. Historically (DRAM 2017–2018, oil 2008, shipping 2007), customer pre-buying at peak prices is followed by sharp inventory destocking when prices roll over. The structural-change narrative frames LTA penetration as a benefit; the capital cycle frames it as a peak signal. 4) Multiple expansion + earnings expansion = asymmetric downside. The previous analysis flagged the 15x NTM P/E multiple as aggressive (referring to UBS PT raise). The capital cycle framework sharpens this: when both earnings and multiple are at peak, the compound drawdown when either reverts is severe. Memory historically goes from 60% gross margin to negative gross margin and from 10x P/E to <5x P/E. Even a modest reversion to 35% gross margin and 8x P/E from current levels implies a 60–75% equity drawdown for the memory primaries — without any disorderly cycle. 5) Supply lag is real but not unique. The bullish point about EUV/TSV/hybrid bonding lead times is correct but mis-weighted. The capital cycle history of other capital-intensive industries (oil refining, shipbuilding, semiconductor wafer fab) shows that long lead times increase the eventual amplitude of the down-cycle: capital decisions made at peak are not reversible when conditions soften, leading to capacity overhang. Long lead times delay the down-cycle; they do not abolish it. 6) China is the textbook capital-cycle disruptor. In Chancellor's historical case studies (steel, shipbuilding, solar, panels, batteries), state-backed Chinese entrants repeatedly compressed margins of consolidated Western/Korean/Japanese oligopolies once technology gaps narrowed. The U.S. equipment restrictions on China have created the illusion that this dynamic is paused, but the data shows CXMT doubled DRAM share in 18 months and is targeting domestic HBM3. The structural-change analysis appropriately flagged this; the capital cycle framework would weight it heavier as the single most important multi-year risk. 7) Substitute capital formation is its own supply curve. The capital cycle framework treats financing flows into substitutes as a parallel supply expansion. Cerebras' $5.5B IPO, Marvell's $5B Celestial acquisition, the Sandisk/SK hynix HBF JV, and the CXL ecosystem (ALAB, MRVL, MCHP) are collectively financing "HBM intensity reduction." Even if HBM unit demand is met, the value capture per dollar of AI compute is diluted. Capital is flowing in adjacent to the memory primaries to reduce the share of AI spend that ends up in their P&L. 8) The bull case relies disproportionately on demand visibility. The capital cycle warns against demand-anchored theses. The bull case requires AI capex to continue at current levels or accelerate, hyperscaler ROI economics to remain favorable, sovereign AI to scale, and inference workloads not to migrate to non-HBM architectures. Each of these is plausible; the joint probability that all hold through 2028 is materially lower than the headline narrative suggests. 9) Sell-side estimate trajectory is itself a signal. UBS's PT trajectory ($535 → $1,625, a 3x increase in one revision) is historically associated with peak euphoria. Estimate revisions of this magnitude have a poor forward record. The framework would treat the velocity of estimate revisions as a contra-signal. 10) Where the asymmetry sits. The capital cycle framework reframes the risk/reward calculation. Even if the bull thesis is right and earnings hold through 2028, the upside from current levels is modest (multiple expansion has already happened). If the bull thesis is partially wrong — say, 2028 brings 25% peak-to-trough EPS decline rather than 50% — the equity drawdown is still material because multiples will compress simultaneously. The asymmetry is not favourable at current valuations. Bottom line: The structural change thesis was directionally correct but materially overweighted by the original analysis. The capital cycle framework appropriately reweights toward supply-side caution and treats current peak conditions, peak valuations, peak management confidence, and accelerating capital inflows as a coherent set of late-cycle signals. The memory industry has undergone real and beneficial structural change in shape, but the empirical base rate against the "cycle has been abolished" claim is overwhelming. The economic characteristics of memory businesses have improved but have not been transformed into stable, compounding, low-volatility ones — and the next 18–30 months are statistically more likely to mark the end of this up-cycle than a transition to a new regime.