Newsletter Subject
King: D-Day, 80 Years On...
From
paradigmpressgroup.com
Email Address
rude@mb.paradigmpressgroup.com
Sent On
Thu, Jun 6, 2024 11:05 AM
Email Preheader Text
Byron King is back for a second day; this time, to discuss the WW2 landings in Europe. June 06, 2024
HTML
Byron King is back for a second day; this time, to discuss the WW2 landings in Europe. June 06, 2024 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( King: D-Day, 80 Years On… SEAN
RING Dear Reader, I’ll leave this solemn subject to Paradigm Press’s elder statesman and historian, Byron King, who wrote this engaging piece for the eightieth anniversary of the D-Day landings. My grandfather, John Zingaro, landed there that fateful day, while Homer King, the father of today’s author, flew ground attack missions overhead. Read all about the Distinguished Flying Cross recipient’s “unintended air conditioning” below. All the best, Sean Ring
Editor, Rude Awakening
X (formerly Twitter): [@seaniechaos]( June 6, 1944: “L-Day” BYRON
KING Wait, what? L-Day? I suspect you thought that June 6, 1944, was D-Day, when U.S.-British-Canadian and other Allies invaded Normandy, France, eighty years ago today. Yes, I know that the event is called D-Day, but for reasons I’ll explain in a moment, let’s go with the letter “L.” Bear with me… Who Put the “D” in D-Day? D-Day is a confusing label. There’s no correct explanation for the letter “D,” not now nor back on June 6, 1944. In fact, in 1964, not quite twenty years after the end of the Second World War, an interviewer asked retired General and former U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower what the D meant. Ike tilted his head, thought for a moment, and wasn’t exactly sure, but it might represent “departure day” when troops kicked off toward the beaches. General Eisenhower and airborne troops, June 5, 1944. U.S. National Archives. Ike’s answer might work if for no other reason than he was the Supreme Allied Commander of the entire operation. He should know, right? Except with all respect to Ike, not everyone who hit the sand in France left their departure point on the same day. Many soldiers “departed” their bases days before the landing, and many sailors were moving into position weeks before June 6. Other historians have opined that the D stood for decision-day or designated day, highlighting the calendar date when the landing craft moved shoreward. This is okay as informed speculation but not definitive. One old Army Staff College acquaintance once explained to me that the D was short for the word “day,” as if to say that the name of the operation was really Day-Day. Let’s just grant that some people differ over the origin of the D-Day label and not bog down on the alphabetical point. More importantly, what occurred on June 6, 1944, was officially named Operation Overlord, the effort by Western powers in the Second World War to conduct an opposed landing in France, move ashore, and open a new front against German forces in occupied Europe. This brings me back to calling the event “L-Day” because the landings were very much about logistics—mostly about logistics, truthfully. Or, as Admiral Ernest King (no relation to your editor), Chief of Naval Operations for most of World War II, once quipped, “I don’t know what the hell this ‘logistics’ is, that [General George] Marshall is always talking about, but I want some of it.” CNO Admiral Ernest King (L) and General George Marshall (R), with General Henry Arnold (C), leave the White House after briefing President Roosevelt on June 6, 1944. U.S. National Archives. [ Strange and Powerful AI Project Revealed]( Jim Rickards was recently passed some urgent new intelligence involving a $10 million A.I. project… That could have a massive and direct impact on your life. Everything you need to know is in this 2-minute AI briefing. [Click here to play his urgent message now.]( [Click Here To Learn More]( The Meaning of June 6 Before we proceed further, pause for a few seconds and acknowledge that June 6, 1944, is truly an important date in U.S. history, as well as British, European, and even Soviet/Russian history. We’ll discuss it all in more depth, anon. If you are so inclined, say a prayer and recall the bravery and sense of duty of everyone who crossed the line and went into France on that late spring day in 1944. As an editorial point of privilege, I’ll mention my long-departed father, Homer King, who served as an Army combat pilot and flew ground attack missions during the June 6 landings. At one point, he piloted his heavily damaged P-47 fighter-bomber back to England, shot full of holes and leaking fuel. He landed and traded his bird in for another one without all the unintended air conditioning. Then he flew back to France. Much later, and somewhat to his surprise, he was called into the colonel’s office to receive a Distinguished Flying Cross. “For extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight.” U.S. Department of Defense. Depending on your age and origins, perhaps you, too, had a father or grandfather, uncle, etc. (and yes, more than a few women in uniform) who participated in the fight in Europe, 1941 – 45. Perhaps your relatives served in the Pacific Theater or some other front across the globe. Or they remained home in the U.S., possibly working at a defense plant. Or maybe it’s none of the above, and don’t worry 'cuz it’s all good. June 6 is your day, too. Sadly, we live in an era when history is poorly taught in most schools and generally unappreciated across our culture. And if the cultural elite shuns any field of history, it’s military history. Just try to find a decent university program in military history at any U.S., Canadian, or British university (hint: good luck; you’ll be laughed out of the faculty lounge at most schools if you say you want to work in military history). Meanwhile, if you want to be underwhelmed, walk through a college campus and ask 19- and 20-year-olds about World War II. To the extent that large numbers of people know much at all about June 6 and D-Day (or L-Day, as I’ll expand in a moment), it’s from movies like Saving Private Ryan (1998) or The Longest Day (1962); or perhaps the television series Band of Brothers (2001). Okay, pilgrims… I’ll take some knowledge of the war over none at all. However, the problem with what you see in movies is that there are a lot of action scenes with soldiers hitting the beach or parachuting from airplanes. They land on the sand, rifle in hand, taking fire from enemy machine guns and artillery. They run up hills, blast away, toss hand grenades, capture pillboxes, and mow down the other side’s soldiers. As it all unfolds, one sees the Hollywood human side, with soldierly bonding, everyone looking out for their buddies, people being wounded and killed, and survivors living to fight another day. Which is to say, learning “history” from watching movies is quite misleading. Because whatever they show on the screen, everything about fighting a war comes back to logistics. Gimme the Fuel, Ammunition and Supplies Consider this: How much gear do you think a typical soldier carries when he jumps out of an airplane or when the landing craft's ramp drops down? Forty pounds? 50? 75? How much ammunition can anyone carry? How many rounds? How many hand grenades? What about troops who haul machine guns or mortars? Crew-served weapons weigh more than you think, as do the rounds they fire. What about medical supplies? Or radios and batteries? Fresh water? And maybe some food? Plus, say, a small shovel, and maybe a rain poncho. And… you get the idea, right? American troops hit the beach on June 6, 1944. U.S. National Archives. Here’s the point. When Tom Hanks and his troops hit the beach in Saving Private Ryan and then humped through minefields and across the dunes, dodging bullets and shrapnel, every one of them had a combat-service life of about an hour, likely less. Because in a very short time span, they would have fired all their ammunition, tossed the grenades, used up the medical supplies, and (as the movie showed) the radio would be shot through. And then what? Well… If it’s you in the dirt, hunkering undercover, you better have some of that “logistics” thing backing you up. That is, after the first boats hit the beach and land troops, the next wave had better be right behind, hauling more troops to replace casualties and a lot of useful supplies, all staged for fast extraction and movement across open fields of fire. More rifle rounds, grenades, mortar shells, ammo belts for machine guns, medical supplies, and people to treat and evacuate the wounded. Then comes engineering equipment like mine clearance devices and armored bulldozers to dig out firing positions. Plus, mobile field artillery and ammunition, along with gun crews and repair kits for when things break, because they always break. And then, in other landing craft, not far behind that second or third wave, you require armored equipment like tanks and personnel carriers, hauling fuel (lots!), ammunition, communication gear, and much more. Indeed, after troops seize the beachhead, things begin to look like this: Landing ships deliver equipment and supplies to Normandy; cargo ships offshore. U.S. National Archives. All of this—troops ashore, with weapons, ammo, gear, equipment, etc., following immediately—is but the tactical end of a massive, operational-strategic-level logistics effort. Logistics, Logistics, and More Logistics Of course, the invasion of June 6 was deeply planned, but the date itself was an accident of the calendar and weather. Immense levels of politics, planning, and war-related, economy-changing production went into the effort. Where to begin? Well, consider how the Soviets were fighting Germany and her allies since the invasion in June 1941. After that, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin constantly demanded that Britain and the U.S. “open a second front” against Germany, considering that the Russians were taking casualties by the millions. To give a feel for the scope of loss in the East, the Battle of Moscow in 1941 cost the Soviets over half a million troops killed. In 1942 - 43, the Soviets lost over 800,000 dead in the first year of the 900-day siege of Leningrad. In the same timeframe, 1942 – 43, Stalingrad cost the Soviets perhaps two million killed, while in 1943, the Kursk battle added another three-quarters of a million dead. In November 1943, at the Tehran Conference, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill promised Stalin that the Western Allies would invade France in May 1944. Of course, to accomplish that mission, the U.S. had to build entire fleets—over ten thousand—of cargo ships and landing craft, along with enough equipment to stage and wage a land war across northern Europe. This illustrates how logistics reflects a nation’s industrial power; stated another way, military power is the first derivative of a nation’s energy base and industrial system. If you want ships, you need steel and machinery. But if you allocate steel and machinery to build ships, then the metal and equipment will not go into tanks or trucks. Plus, you need everything else that goes into ships, ranging from propellers to anchor chains, plus trained crews that take time to recruit and assemble. Another U.S. strategic-logistical constraint was that the country was at war against Japan in the Pacific Theater. Admiral Nimitz and General MacArthur also wanted ships, aircraft, weapons, ammunition, fuel, medical supplies, trained personnel, and much else. While Russians died fighting Germans, Americans and British died, too, in ocean-spanning battles across the western and southwest Pacific. And don’t neglect learning curves. For example, one early logistical disaster occurred in August 1942, with the battle for Guadalcanal, east of New Guinea. Basically, the Navy and Marines did a piss-poor job of loading cargo ships, such that critical materials were buried in the holds beneath less critical supplies. Then, at Guadalcanal, Marines waded ashore, and supplies were slow to follow. In fact, most cargo never even made it to the beach because Japanese air attacks drove the ships away, leaving Marines stranded and scrounging for everything. By the second day, Marines were down to half-rations and soon had to sift through the sand to find random rounds of dropped ammunition. Two years later, in 1944, the costly lessons of Guadalcanal were incorporated into the invasion of Normandy. The plan involved detailed mapping and intelligence gathering, overwhelming air supremacy, massive naval gunfire support, robust communications, and literally thousands of well-staged cargo ships offshore hauling fuel, ammunition, heavy weapons, medical support, and an encyclopedia of other warfighting kit. Even then, Operation Overlord had problems. The weather in May was bad, so the invasion was postponed to June. Tides and moonlight dictated a short window of June 5 – 7, but much also depended on fickle weather. Even then, on June 6, winds and waves were severe enough to blow many airborne troops and seaborne landing craft away from their assigned targets, leading to deep levels of the proverbial “fog of war.” And today, eighty years later, we remember it all, each in our own way and as best we can. The full story of just June 6 alone is a tale far too long to tell here, let alone to relate how the invasion unfolded in the following days, weeks, and months. The immediate takeaway is to recall and honor the bravery of soldiers and sailors past and the brilliance of planners who put the operation together. That, and understanding that nothing big, complex, and important happens absent immense levels of thought and attention to detail; it could not happen back then and does not happen today. Which is to say, bone up on your logistics. That’s all for now. And thank you for subscribing and reading. Best wishes, Byron W. King
Senior Geologist
Military Historian
Global Favorite
Paradigm Press Group Rate this email Like Dislike Thanks for rating this content! Looks like something went wrong. Please try to rate again. In Case You Missed It… Lawfare: Honest Money in a Culture of Untruth and Compulsion BYRON
KING This month in Strategic Intelligence, Jim Rickards examines “lawfare,” the process of attacking an opponent through the legal system. I’ll follow Jim’s theme but address things from a different angle. Here, we’ll ponder the pursuit of honest money and wealth protection in a culture that is increasingly built on a foundation of untruth, misdirection, and outright lies. Of course, I’ll also present some investable ideas. Warfare and Lawfare: Two Bookends of Compulsion First, let’s briefly revisit Jim’s key point, about how lawfare is a combination of law and warfare. That is, instead of one side attacking the other with armies of soldiers, the assault comes via armies of lawyers. And instead of operational movements on a battlefield, one side works to wreck the other within the confines of the legal system. Keep in mind, though, that at a fundamental level warfare and lawfare are two ends of the same spectrum, namely that of compulsion. On that last point, one pithy definition of warfare comes from the German theorist Karl von Clausewitz, who in the 1830s wrote about war and strategy based on his experiences fighting against Napoleon: “War,” said Clausewitz,“is an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” In many ways, Clausewitz’s short sentence embodies the essence of warfare. Indeed, the guy wrote a 500-page book wrapped around that concept, and over the past 190 years, other fine thinkers have filled many a library shelf with further discussion. But you get the point. At the other end of the spectrum of compulsion lies the non-kinetic approach, meaning to use a legal system to force another to “do our will,” to borrow Clausewitz’s phrase; the trials of Donald Trump – literal and figurative – being the foremost current example. In Trump’s case (or his numerous cases, to be exact), the former president is not dodging real bullets but instead must fight his battles on far-flung legalistic fronts. These have ranged from procedural skirmishes in Colorado and Maine to deny him ballot access, based on ill-defined, conclusory allegations of “insurrection,” a Constitutional point resolved in his favor by the U.S. Supreme Court; to serial criminal indictments in Florida, Georgia, the District of Columbia and New York over a wide range of matters: classified documents, election questions, “January 6” events, and paying for a nondisclosure agreement. The goal of all this anti-Trump lawfare is perfectly obvious. Trump’s political opponents want to hamstring him in terms of lost time and adverse media attention, huge legal bills, burdensome discovery, eye-popping financial penalties, and possibly the stigma of a criminal conviction, if not incarceration. But as the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for… Because the more Trump’s political enemies pile on, the higher he has risen in the polls. In recent months, Trump has been isolated inside courthouses, listening to prosecutors accuse him, witnesses malign him, and judges chastise him. Still, at the end of each day he has walked out to a sea of microphones and cameras to hold press conferences that receive global coverage. One might even say that Trump bears up well under the stress and looks rather “presidential” in his ability to absorb abuse and fire back at the other side. One way or another, and as more than a few surveys clearly demonstrate, an innate sense of the rank unfairness of the anti-Trump lawfare has spread wide and far. If the election was held today, Trump could win. As to the outcomes of these Trump trials, we shall see. One criminal matter is now in the hands of a Manhattan jury, and anything could happen. Looking ahead months and years, no doubt we’ll watch the Trump appeals unfold from his cases, and the scope of what’s called, in antiseptic terms, “reversible error” will become manifest. Or let’s put it this way: if use of the legal system for political ends is a form of political warfare, then abominable misuse of the legal system is a form of war crime, and nobody wants to be on the side of war criminals. Apparently, the Lawfare fanatics failed to think this through. Our Culture of Untruth Sad to say, one factor that enables lawfare such as what we see with Trump is that we live in a gullible, miseducated culture that is wide open to mass persuasion towards preposterous ends. When large numbers of people hear little else but a litany of tailored tales, they can be made to believe just about anything. Yeah, sure, we have our wonderful First Amendment in the U.S. Constitution, and anyone can find their inner Benjamin Franklin and publish a newspaper. Then again, we live in an era when most channels for news are wrapped up quite tightly by people and institutions that control what gets out. At root, the issue of “what is the news?” is economic because, like with any other business, running a news site and related newspaper has expenses, and the bottom line always rules. Across the U.S., over the past two decades, more than 2,000 local and regional newspapers have closed their doors, succumbing to high costs and competition from so-called “free” news on the internet. One major city example is the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, which has been in business since the 1780s but is now a shadow of its former self. It’s published in paper only on Thursdays and Sundays. (But to be fair, it’s online every day.) Meanwhile, if you’re above a certain age you likely recall how three networks dominated television news in those olden days: CBS, NBC, and ABC. Perhaps you remember how the late newsreader Walter Cronkite used to sign off his evening broadcast with his iconic line, “And that’s the way it is…” Walter Cronkite: “And that’s the way it is…” Well, that was the “way it is” per Cronkite’s opinion. He and his producers were ruthless about what to include in the man’s 22-minute weeknight news show. And the fact is that, over many years, Cronkite and CBS left plenty of important news and perspective on the cutting room floor; definitely, they left out anything that was contrary to what they wanted the audience to know. Or consider the inordinate power of the New York Times and Washington Post. Over many decades, they have published innumerable stories that created national levels of narrative. In other words, if something was “in the Times” or “in the Post,” then large numbers of people believed that the story was a real thing, and that the resulting worldview was appropriate. All this, while many other news sources took their cue, if not doctrine, from these two newspapers (NPR, I’m looking at you!). This all makes for a long discussion, which I’ll spare you; but the point is that personal views and biases, and editorial decisions by a small handful of people have long shaped widespread public perceptions and opinions in the U.S. Now, fast-forward to today, when network news remains in the hands of corporate insiders, and the Times-Post narrative still dominates nationwide storylines. Plus, we now have all-digital sites like Google and Facebook/Meta, which are in the business of curating narratives to the point of notorious shadow bans that all but censor content that goes against certain political grains. Or recall how, for way too long, ex-Twitter shadow-banned and censored people and content. Things became so openly notorious that Elon Musk came in and grossly overpaid to buy the site, an act of public charity in support of honest discussion. Now called “X,” we’ll see how it all evolves. Consider Donald Trump’s new site, “Truth Social.” This is an effort to create a content platform with far less oversight and moderation than, say, Facebook, YouTube, etc. That is, Truth Social is not just Trump’s personal bullhorn; it’s an open forum, with its own hardware system, to support content creators. It won’t get canceled like the former Parler site simply vanished way back in 2021. Again, we’ll see how this evolves over time. So, as we discuss lawfare, and certainly the anti-Trump lawfare, one point to keep in mind is that it only succeeds when large numbers of people don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes, in the shadows. If all that one hears or sees are inflammatory headlines atop partisan articles written by hacks who cherry-pick facts or just plain make stuff up, then yes… one might just believe anything, to one's long-term detriment. Financial Lawfare We could talk all day about Trump and lawfare, but let’s go to a different level of the basic idea. Let’s discuss a different version of lawfare, namely the use and misuse of financial sanctions by the U.S. against other nations, with the goal of shaping or changing the other side’s political behavior; in other words, how the U.S. utilizes its legal and financial power at the strategic and geostrategic level. One historical example of U.S. lawfare at an international level is America’s use of sanctions against Japan in 1939 – 41, prompted by Japanese aggression against China. It’s a long story, and for a highly detailed explanation see a superb book published in 2007 by historian Edward Miller, entitled Bankrupting the Enemy: The U.S. Financial Siege of Japan Before Pearl Harbor. In short, U.S. sanctions cut off Japan from international banking services and eventually embargoed Japan from buying oil, iron ore and more. It must have seemed like a great idea to the lawyers in Washington, D.C., but over time the sanctions contributed mightily to Japan’s government decision to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor in December 1941. In other words, those legalistic U.S. sanctions directly pulled the U.S. into the Second World War. Postwar, and over many decades, the U.S. government continued to use economic sanctions – a form of lawfare, to be sure – against geopolitical opponents. The U.S. government placed sanctions against communist nations during the Cold War, such as the Soviet Union, and we still have long-running sanctions against, say, Cuba. These and many more. More recently, the U.S. and Wes placed sanctions against Russia over the conflict in Ukraine, dating back to Russia’s takeover of Crimea in 2014. Over the past decade, the U.S. has enacted all manner of sanctions against Russian individuals, companies, government entities and others. Since February 2022, and over the past two years, since Russian tanks first rolled into Ukraine, the U.S. has placed enormous numbers and variations of new sanctions against Russia and Russians, up to barring that nation from using the SWIFT system (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Transactions); in essence, the U.S. cut Russia out of the standard international system for finance and commerce. So, one might ask: have these anti-Russian sanctions – U.S. lawfare – been effective? Have they worked? Well, apparently not because Russia seems to be doing just fine, economically. Right now, the Russian economy is humming nicely, at near full employment; indeed, Russia reports labor shortages due to the needs of its internal, organic growth coupled with wartime demand for military products. Russia remains among the world’s leading producers of energy (oil, gas, uranium), metals and materials, agricultural products, and various forms of machinery and finished goods, including high-end aerospace technology. All this while Russia maintains robust trade relationships with the world’s two largest nations, China and India. Russia’s national debt is about 14% of gross domestic product (GDP), compared with the U.S. national debt, which is about 140% of GDP and climbing. Plus, to cap it all off, Russia has the world’s best ratio of gold reserves versus GDP. Another way to say it is that Russia is “too big to sanction.” Russia has too much energy, resources, industry, and definitely plenty of gold in the national vaults. Another blowback from all this is that U.S. sanctions have led to massive, global-scale de-dollarization, a situation in which many trading nations switched to other currencies (i.e., not the dollar) to settle accounts. Protect Your Wealth from Lawfare Okay, now let’s get personal. What does lawfare mean to you, whether it’s against Trump, Russia, or anyone else? Well, it’s definitely not a positive thing – not a favorable harbinger of the future – that the U.S. legal system has become weaponized, let alone that lawfare has a growing constituency. If prosecutors can come after Trump for whatever sort of charges they can concoct, they can go after anybody. If judges and juries can personalize the legal process against people or entities that they just plain don’t like, we’re sliding down the proverbial slippery slope. Frankly, based on what we’ve seen in the courtrooms of New York City, you’d have to be crazy to trust the fairness of that jurisdiction. Meanwhile, the D.C. courts are equally hyper-partisan, with surly judges and biased jury pools that seem to be brain-melded to the left-wing editorial board and self-styled progressive columnists of the Washington Post. Of course, de-dollarization means that many nations across the globe now require fewer dollars for their own trade; so, they use their American currency to buy “real” things like precious metals, oil, or other assets, and this includes bidding up U.S. real estate, which prices locals out of many markets. If you are a regular reader, then by now you must know where this is going: protect your wealth with hard assets, such as energy, precious metals, and commodities. We’ve long been fans of ExxonMobil (XOM) and Chevron (CVX) as dividend-paying energy plays; they’re big, asset-rich, and have plenty of money to pay lawyers when they get sued in other lawfare cases over so-called “climate change” and similar. If you believe Donald Trump will be the next president in January 2025, one strong call on future energy is with U.S. offshore oil and gas. For that, look at drilling plays like Transocean (RIG) and Diamond Offshore (DO). And don’t forget service plays like Schlumberger (SLB) and Oceaneering International (OII). For precious metals, you should definitely own physical bullion, meaning gold and silver. Prices have moved strongly in the past year, with more to come in our ongoing era of inflation and blowout government spending. We’ve often discussed large mining plays like Barrick (GOLD) and Newmont (NEM), and we’ve mentioned a great, smaller play just on the cusp of serious cash flow, a company called Contango Ore (CTGO), which works in Alaska. On the commodity side, we like Freeport-McMoRan (FCX) for copper and many other metals, as well as Rio Tinto (RIO) for copper and a wide array of related metals. Note that these are all general recommendations, some in the portfolio and some not. We won’t track names that are not in our official portfolio, but I keep an eye on all of these companies. I’m confident that these names will hold up in whatever economic or business environment we encounter in the next few years. Finally, keep in mind the distinction between a legal system and a justice system. That is, every country has a legal system: Stalin’s Soviet Union had a legal system, Mao’s China had a legal system, and Pol Pot’s Cambodia had a legal system. But were they “justice” systems? For over two centuries, one of the great national strengths of the U.S. was that, overall, our legal system also focused on delivering fair and impartial justice. Yes, the country had problems at times and in places; Southern Jim Crow comes to mind and more. But the country has never before put on such a sordid legal spectacle as we see with former President Trump. This too will pass, or so we hope. Meanwhile, protect your wealth. Look for honest money while we collectively search for a way out of our current era of deep untruth. Thank you for subscribing and reading. Best wishes… All the best, Byron W. King
Senior Geologist P.S. Make sure you watch Jim Rickards’ amazing video about the Trump Witch Hunt [here](. ☰ ⊗
[ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2024 Paradigm Press, LLC. 1001 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, MD 21201. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Rude Awakening e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Rude Awakening, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@rudeawakening.info. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Rude Awakening is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your Rude Awakening subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Rude Awakening.](
EDM Keywords (522)
yes
years
wrote
wreck
wrapped
wounded
would
world
works
work
words
women
within
wish
whether
whatever
western
went
well
weather
wealth
way
waves
watch
washington
warfare
war
wanted
want
walked
wage
variations
utilizes
using
use
untruth
uniform
understanding
ukraine
type
try
trust
trump
truly
troops
trials
treat
traded
trade
toward
today
times
time
thursdays
thought
think
theme
thank
terms
tell
tanks
takeover
take
suspect
surprise
sure
support
supplies
sundays
suggestions
succeeds
subscribing
subscribers
submitting
stress
strategic
story
stood
still
stigma
staged
stage
spectrum
speak
spare
soviets
soon
somewhat
something
soldiers
slow
sliding
situation
site
similar
sign
sift
side
show
shot
short
share
shaping
shadows
shadow
served
sense
sees
seen
seem
see
security
seconds
second
sea
scrounging
scope
schools
scenes
say
sand
sanctions
sadly
ruthless
russians
russia
run
rounds
root
risen
reviewing
respecting
respect
reply
rent
remember
relation
relate
recruit
recommendation
recently
receive
recall
reasons
reason
rating
rate
ranged
radios
quipped
questions
put
pursuit
published
publish
publications
publication
protecting
prospectus
prosecutors
propellers
project
producers
process
proceed
problems
problem
privilege
privacy
printed
prayer
postponed
post
possibly
portfolio
ponder
polls
point
plenty
play
planners
plain
piloted
phrase
perspective
personalize
perhaps
people
paying
pause
pass
participating
participated
parachuting
paper
overall
outcomes
origin
opponent
opinions
opinion
opined
operation
open
one
okay
office
occurred
normandy
none
next
newspaper
news
never
needs
need
navy
nations
nation
narrative
names
name
must
much
mow
moving
movies
moscow
months
month
monitored
money
moment
moderation
misuse
mission
missed
minefields
mind
millions
microphones
metals
metal
message
mentioned
mention
meaning
maybe
may
massive
marines
many
manner
man
makes
maine
mailing
mailbox
made
machinery
lot
loss
looking
look
long
logistics
live
litany
line
like
licensed
letter
let
leningrad
length
legal
left
led
leave
learn
lawyers
lawfare
law
laughed
landings
landing
landed
land
knowledge
know
king
killed
keep
juries
jumps
judges
japan
issue
invasion
insurrection
institutions
instead
inflation
indeed
incorporated
include
incarceration
importantly
illustrates
ike
humped
however
honor
holes
hold
hit
history
historians
higher
hell
hands
hamstring
half
hacks
guadalcanal
grant
gold
going
goes
goal
go
globe
give
gets
get
gdp
gas
future
france
foundation
form
force
following
follow
fired
fire
find
finance
figurative
fighting
fight
field
feel
feedback
favor
father
far
fans
fairness
fair
fact
eye
extent
explained
explain
expenses
expand
exiting
exit
exact
evolves
everything
everyone
event
evacuate
essence
era
equipment
entities
ensure
enemy
end
encyclopedia
encounter
enacted
employees
election
effort
effective
editors
economic
east
duty
doubt
dollar
doctrine
district
distinction
discussion
discuss
dig
detail
department
deny
definitely
deemed
day
date
cusp
currencies
culture
cue
crossed
crimea
create
crazy
courtrooms
course
country
could
copper
control
contrary
consulting
constitution
consider
consent
conflict
confines
confident
conduct
concoct
concept
compulsion
competition
compel
companies
communication
commodities
committed
commerce
come
combination
columbia
colorado
colonel
closed
click
china
charges
channels
changing
certainly
cases
case
careful
cap
canadian
cameras
cambodia
calling
called
calendar
buy
business
buried
britain
brings
brilliance
bravery
bog
bird
big
biases
better
best
believe
behind
beach
battles
battle
barring
bad
back
audience
attention
attacking
attack
assets
artillery
arrival
armies
archive
appropriate
anything
anyone
anybody
another
america
allow
alaska
airplanes
airplane
age
advised
advertisements
address
act
across
acknowledge
account
accomplish
accident
ability
2021
2014
2007
1964
1944
1943
1780s
140
14