TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
? The Dinarian on Locals brings you the latest in news, interviews, in-depth conversations, and stories from across the blockchain and global communities—within and beyond cryptocurrency ?. Experts delve into how blockchain technology is reshaping industries, enhancing business networks ?, transforming transaction workflows, and advancing distributed ledger systems ??. We also explore intriguing topics that may venture into the realm of conspiracies—and so much more!
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Defense Experts Game Out US-China War Over Taiwan; Dalio Warns Escalations 'Very Dangerous'

A group of American defense experts operating out of a 5th floor suite in Washington DC have been mapping out a hypothetical war between the United States and China over Taiwan.

"The results are showing that under most — though not all — scenarios, Taiwan can repel an invasion," said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which has been simulating various war scenarios. "However, the cost will be very high to the Taiwanese infrastructure and economy and to US forces in the Pacific."

In sessions that will run through September, retired US generals and Navy officers and former Pentagon officials hunch like chess players over tabletops along with analysts from the CSIS think tank. They move forces depicted as blue and red boxes and small wooden squares over maps of the Western Pacific and Taiwan. The results will be released to the public in December. -Bloomberg

The base assumption is that China invades Taiwan to force unification, which the US responds to with its military. Another assumption (that's 'far from certain') is that Japan would grant 'expanded rights' to use US bases on its territory - but wouldn't intervene directly unless Japanese land is attacked.

Nuclear weapons are not part of the scenarios, and the weapons used in the simulation are the most likely to be deployed based on current capabilities of the nations involved.

News of the war game simulations come as China began test-firing missiles in recent days following House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) visit to Taiwan.So far, 18 of 22 rounds of the simulation to date have resulted in Chinese missiles sinking a large part of the US and Japanese surface fleet, and would destroy "hundreds of aircraft on the ground," according to Cancian, a former White House defense budget analyst and retired US Marine.

"However, allied air and naval counterattacks hammer the exposed Chinese amphibious and surface fleet, eventually sinking about 150 ships," he added.

"The reason for the high US losses is that the United States cannot conduct a systematic campaign to take down Chinese defenses before moving in close," Cancian continued. "The United States must send forces to attack the Chinese fleet, especially the amphibious ships, before establishing air or maritime superiority."

"To get a sense of the scale of the losses, in our last game iteration, the United States lost over 900 fighter/attack aircraft in a four-week conflict. That’s about half the Navy and Air Force inventory."

According to the simulations, the Chinese missile force "is devastating while the inventory lasts," which makes US subs and long-range-capable bombers "particularly important." Also key, is Taiwan's defense capabilities, because its forces would be primarily responsible for countering Chinese landings from the South.

"The success or failure of the ground war depends entirely on the Taiwanese forces," said Cancian. "In all game iterations so far, the Chinese could establish a beachhead but in most circumstances cannot expand it. The attrition of their amphibious fleet limits the forces they can deploy and sustain. In a few instances, the Chinese were able to hold part of the island but not conquer the entire island."

"For the Taiwanese, anti-ship missiles are important, surface ships and aircraft less so," because surface ships "have a hard time surviving as long as the Chinese have long-range missiles available."

There have been no estimates so far on lives lost, or the sweeping economic impact of such a conflict between the US and China.

As Bridgewater's Ray Dalio notes, "The US-China Tit-For-Tat Escalations Are Very Dangerous."

Unfortunately, what is happening now between the US and China over Taiwan is following the classic path to war laid out in my book "Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order.” If events continue to follow this path, this conflict will have a much larger global impact than the Russia-Ukraine war because it is between the world's leading superpowers that are economically much larger and much more intertwined.

For reasons previously explained, the Russia-Ukraine war is minor by comparison, though the two conflicts are related and the Russia-Ukraine war, like all wars, is having terrible consequences. For example, consider that China's share of world trade is over seven times larger than Russia's [1] and constitutes about 19% of all American manufactured goods imports. [2] Imagine if importing goods from China and doing business with China became the same as they are with Russia now. Imagine what the supply chain and economic impacts on the world would be. Imagine what sanctions on China would be like for the world. Supply chains would collapse, economic activity would dive, and inflation would soar. And that’s just what would happen to economies due to economic warfare which would pale in comparison to the impact that military warfare, which we are obviously dangerously close to, would have.

For reasons explained in my book, the situation that now exists between the United States and China is very similar to that which existed between powers immediately prior to World Wars I and II and many other immediate prewar periods. The chart below shows my US-China conflict gauge since 2000. As you can see, the readings for conflict between the US and China are the highest ever.

This index is composed of many indicators such as changes in military spending, personnel, and deployment; sentiment of each country's people about the other country; media attention given to the conflict, etc. The combination of military spending and attitudes toward each rival country has been particularly indicative. The chart below shows the shares of global military spending for the US and China which significantly understates China’s military spending because much government spending that supports the military is not included as direct military spending. Also, American military spending covers the world while Chinese military spending is more focused in the region. Knowledgeable parties tell me that China has significant military superiority around Taiwan.

The chart below plots recent Gallop poll data and shows that 80% of Americans now have an unfavorable view of China—which is now on par with how Americans view Russia (and is up meaningfully over the past few years).

To put the existing level of conflict between China and the US in perspective, the table below compares the current US-China conflict gauge reading to past readings of other great conflicts. As shown, the current reading for the US and China is nearly 1.2 standard deviations above the average, which is a reading in the high end of the range of major conflicts. While this conveys a high level and risk of conflict, it should not be misinterpreted to mean that a worsening is to come. Sometimes, these moments of heightened conflict are followed by a stepping back from war. For example, the period leading into the Cuban Missile Crisis had a relatively high reading of 0.9, but wise heads prevailed, so a potential disaster was avoided.

There are many more measures that convey the changing picture that are explained in my book which I don’t have the space to show you here, but will continue to plot along with the historical analogies I outlined in the book. I will use them to paint as accurate a picture as I can about what's happening and put it into an historical context. The dot plot will speak for itself as to which path we are on.

As for what's now happening, the Chinese are responding to Nancy Pelosi’s visit by cutting off most relations and demonstrating that they can militarily control the area around Taiwan, which implies that China could shut Taiwan off from the rest of the world. Imagine that and its implications, e.g., imagine if semiconductor chips couldn't get out of Taiwan. China is also displaying its military power and it is crossing previously uncrossed lines of demarcation, thus closing in on Taiwan. [7]

Pelosi's visit was perceived by China as a move in favor of Taiwan's independence rather than toward one China with Taiwan part of China, and it is essentially challenging the US to stop it from doing what it is doing. The question is whether the US will respond with another escalation that will prompt another Chinese response, in the classic tit-for-tat acceleration into war, or if the sides will step back.

To gain a picture of the past and the forces that are driving the evolution of the US and China toward war (i.e. the Big Cycle) I suggest that you review Chapter 13 "US-China Relations and Wars." I suggest that you pay particular attention to my explanation of previous Taiwan Straits crises and why I said I would worry if we had a "Fourth Taiwan Crisis" which is the crisis that we are now having. To understand what is happening you must understand these things.

As I summarized on page 455 of that Chapter in the section "The Risk of Unnecessary War:" Stupid wars often happen as a result of a tit-for-tat escalation process in which responding to even small actions of an adversary is more important than being perceived as weak, especially when those on both sides don’t really understand the motivations of those on the other side. History shows us that this is especially a problem for declining empires, which tend to fight more than is logical because any retreat is seen as a defeat. Take the issue of Taiwan. Even though the US fighting to defend Taiwan would seem to be illogical, not fighting a Chinese attack on Taiwan might be perceived as being a big loss of stature and power over other countries that won’t support the US if it doesn’t fight and win for its allies. Additionally, such defeats can make leaders look weak to their own people, which can cost them the political support they need to remain in power. And, of course, miscalculations due to misunderstandings when conflicts are transpiring quickly are dangerous. All these dynamics create strong pulls toward wars accelerating even though such mutually destructive wars are so much worse than cooperating and competing in more peaceful ways. There is also risk of untruthful, emotional rhetoric taking hold in both the US and China, creating an atmosphere for escalation.

While the power of the forces behind the Big Cycle explained in "Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order” can be overwhelming, people still have choices that will affect the outcomes. This conflict is still a low-grade military conflict (which I call a Category 2 military conflict) because 1) it has not yet produced an exchange of bloodshed of people from the two major sides i.e., Chinese and/or Americans and 2) it is not taking place on either country’s homeland (though the Chinese would say Taiwan is part of their homeland even though it’s not part of mainland China). If either of these were to change, that would be the next big step up toward unimaginable all-out war which I still consider improbable.

A good thing is that sensible people on both sides are scared of war even though they don’t want to look like they are. A bad thing is that some people on both sides want to intensify the fight because to not do so in the face of the provocation wound be perceived as a sign of weakness. That dynamic of upping the ante to avoid looking like one is backing down has throughout history been shown to be a very dangerous dynamic. We have seen many historic cases which have led to terrible wars because neither side wanted to back down and only few in which sensible people stepped back from the brink when faced with the prospect of unacceptable destruction.

My hope is that China’s escalation will not lead to the next US escalation which will lead to the next Chinese escalation which, despite the strong desire of sensible people on both sides to avoid war, would lead to a war. But hope is not a strategy, so I will try to be as realistic as possible, navigate accordingly, and communicate well with you.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/defense-experts-game-out-us-china-war-over-taiwan-dalio-warns-escalations-very

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Brad Garlinghouse In Washington 🚀

It’s time for a fair and open level playing field.

Under Gary Gensler it was quite the opposite.

  • Brad Garlinghouse
    July 9, 2025
00:01:56
More Of The Same...l

🚨 JUST IN: Patriot Tom Fitton, who has been fighting DOJ and FBI to release documents for years, has practically thrown in the towel.

👉 "The justice department and the FBI are irredeemably compromised and corrupted.
The leadership needs to understand that and act accordingly." ~Tom Fitton

00:01:30
Christine Lagarde just gave Ripple & Circle A Shoutout!
00:00:44
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

👉 Here’s what you need to know:

💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

same for: https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/686e68f5d405956445e039ff/

🚨 Ripple Picks BNY Mellon to Back RLUSD Stablecoin Amid Major Surge 🚨

Ripple has selected BNY Mellon, one of the world’s largest and most trusted financial institutions, to serve as the primary custodian for its RLUSD stablecoin. This decision comes as RLUSD experiences a surge in demand, highlighting growing institutional interest in Ripple’s stablecoin offering.

🔹 Institutional Partnership

🔹 BNY Mellon will safeguard the reserves backing RLUSD, ensuring transparency, security, and regulatory compliance for the stablecoin.

🔹 This partnership is designed to build trust with both institutional and retail users by leveraging BNY Mellon’s expertise in asset custody.

🔹 RLUSD’s Rapid Growth

🔹 RLUSD has seen a significant increase in adoption, reflecting confidence in Ripple’s approach to stablecoins and its commitment to compliance and transparency.

🔹 The collaboration with BNY ...

From Wall Street to Web3: Building Tomorrow’s Digital Asset Markets

COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS will meet in OPEN SESSION, HYBRID FORMAT to conduct a hearing entitled, “From Wall Street to Web3: Building Tomorrow’s Digital Asset Markets.” The witnesses will be: The Honorable Summer Mersinger, CEO, Blockchain Association; Mr. Jonathan Levin, CEO, Chainalysis; Mr. Dan Robinson, General Partner, Paradigm; Mr. Brad Garlinghouse, CEO, Ripple; The Honorable Timothy Massad, Research Fellow and Director of Digital Assets Policy Project of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, former CFTC Chairman; and Mr. Richard Painter, S. Walter Richey Professor of Corporate Law, University of Minnesota Law School, former Associate Counsel to the President and chief White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.banking.senate.gov/hearings/from-wall-street-to-web3-building-tomorrows-digital-asset-markets

‼️XRP ETF INFOGRAPHIC REVEALS AMERICAN EXPRESS UTILIZES XRP‼️

“A well-known company that uses XRP is American Express, which leverages RippleNet to enable realtime cross-border payments for corporate clients.

Through its partnership with Ripple, American Express uses XRP indirectlyvia Ripple's infrastructure to facilitate faster and more transparent transactions between the U.S. and international markets, helping businesses move money efficiently and reduce settlement times from days to seconds.”✅

OP: Smqkedqg

post photo preview
post photo preview
Musk Turns On Starlink to Save Iranians from Regime’s Internet Crackdown

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and a visionary behind SpaceX, has flipped the switch on Starlink, delivering internet to Iranians amid a brutal regime crackdown.

This move comes on the heels of Israeli strikes targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, as the Islamic Republic cuts off online access.

The former Department of Government Efficiency chief activated Starlink satellite internet service for Iranians on Saturday following the Islamic Republic's decision to impose nationwide internet restrictions.

As the Jerusalem Post reports, that the Islamic Republic’s Communications Ministry announced the move, stating, "In view of the special conditions of the country, temporary restrictions have been imposed on the country’s internet."

This action followed a series of Israeli attacks on Iranian targets.

Starlink, a SpaceX-developed satellite constellation, provides high-speed internet to regions with limited connectivity, such as remote areas or conflict zones.

Elizabeth MacDonald, a Fox News contributor, highlighted its impact, noting, "Elon Musk turning on Starlink for Iran in 2022 was a game changer. Starlink connects directly to SpaceX satellites, bypassing Iran’s ground infrastructure. That means even during government-imposed shutdowns or censorship, users can still get online, and reportedly more than 100,000 inside Iran are doing that."

During the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" protests, Starlink enabled Iranians to communicate and share footage globally despite network blackouts," she added.

MacDonald also mentioned ongoing tests of "direct-to-cell" capabilities, which could allow smartphone connections without a dish, potentially expanding access and supporting free expression and protest coordination.

Musk confirmed the activation, noting on Saturday, "The beams are on."

This follows the regime’s internet shutdowns, which were triggered by Israeli military actions.

Adding to the tension, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people on Friday, urging resistance against the regime.

"Israel's fight is not against the Iranian people. Our fight is against the murderous Islamic regime that oppresses and impoverishes you,” he said.

Meanwhile, Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last monarch, called on military and security forces to abandon the regime, accusing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a Persian-language social media post of forcing Iranians into an unwanted war.

Starlink has been a beacon in other crises. Beyond Iran, Musk has leveraged Starlink to assist people during natural disasters and conflicts.

In the wake of hurricanes and earthquakes, Starlink has provided critical internet access to affected communities, enabling emergency communications and coordination.

Similarly, during the Ukraine-Russia conflict, Musk activated Starlink to support Ukrainian forces and civilians, ensuring they could maintain contact and access vital information under dire circumstances.

The genius entrepreneur, is throwing a lifeline to the oppressed in Iran, and the libs can’t stand it.

Conservative talk show host Mark Levin praised Musk’s action, reposting a message stating that Starlink would "reconnect the Iranian people with the internet and put the final nail in the coffin of the Iranian regime."

"God bless you, Elon. The Starlink beams are on in Iran!" Levin wrote.

Musk, who recently stepped down from leading the DOGE in the Trump administration, has apologized to President Trump for past criticisms, including his stance on the One Big Beautiful Bill.

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto – Support via Coinbase Wallet to: [email protected]

Or Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

Your generosity keeps this mission alive, for all! Namasté 🙏 Crypto Michael ⚡  The Dinarian

Read full Article
post photo preview
GENIUS Act lets State banks conduct some business nationwide. Regulators object

The Senate passed the GENIUS Act for stablecoins last week, but significant work remains before it becomes law. The House has a different bill, the STABLE Act, with notable differences that must be reconciled. State banking regulators have raised strong objections to a provision in the GENIUS Act that would allow state banks to operate nationwide without authorization from host states or a federal regulator.

The controversial clause permits a state bank with a regulated stablecoin subsidiary to provide money transmitter and custodial services in any other state. While host states can impose consumer protection laws, they cannot require the usual authorization and oversight typically needed for out-of-state banking operations.

The Conference of State Bank Supervisors welcomed some changes in the GENIUS Act but remains adamantly opposed to this particular provision. In a statement, CSBS said:

“Critical changes must be made during House consideration of the legislation to prevent unintended consequences and further mitigate financial stability risks. CSBS remains concerned with the dramatic and unsupported expansion of the authority of uninsured banks to conduct money transmission or custody activities nationwide without the approval or oversight of host state supervisors (Sec. 16(d)).”

The National Conference of State Legislatures expressed similar concerns in early June, stating:

“We urge you to oppose Section 16(d) and support state authority to regulate financial services in a manner that reflects local conditions, priorities and risk tolerances. Preserving the dual banking system and respecting state autonomy is essential to the safety, soundness and diversity of our nation’s financial sector.”

Evolution of nationwide authorization

Section 16 addresses several issues beyond stablecoins, including preventing a recurrence of the SEC’s SAB 121, which forced crypto assets held in custody onto balance sheets. However, the nationwide authorization subsection was added after the legislation cleared the Senate Banking Committee, with two significant modifications since then.

Originally, the provision applied only to special bank charters like Wyoming’s Special Purpose Depository Institutions or Connecticut’s Innovation Banks. Examples include crypto-focused Custodia Bank and crypto exchange Kraken in Wyoming, plus traditional finance player Fnality US in Connecticut. Recently the scope was expanded to cover most state chartered banks with stablecoin subsidiaries, possibly due to concerns about competitive advantages.

Simultaneously, the clause was substantially tightened. The initial version allowed state chartered banks to provide money transmission and custody services nationwide for any type of asset, which would include cryptocurrencies. Now these activities can only be conducted by the stablecoin subsidiary, and while Section 16(d) doesn’t explicitly limit services to stablecoins, the GENIUS Act currently restricts issuers to stablecoin related activities.

However, the House STABLE Act takes a more permissive approach, allowing regulators to decide which non-stablecoin activities are permitted. If the House version prevails in reconciliation, it could result in a significant expansion of allowed nationwide banking activities beyond stablecoins.

Is it that bad?

As originally drafted, the clause seemed overly permissive.

The amended clause makes sense for stablecoin issuers. They want to have a single regulator and be able to provide the stablecoin services throughout the United States. But it also leans into the perception outside of crypto that this is just another form of regulatory arbitrage.

The controversy over Section 16(d) reflects concerns about creating a regulatory gap that allows banks to operate interstate without the oversight typically required from either federal or state authorities. As the two Congressional chambers work toward reconciliation, lawmakers must decide whether stablecoin legislation should include provisions that effectively reduce traditional banking oversight requirements.

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto – Support via Coinbase Wallet to: [email protected]

Or Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

Your generosity keeps this mission alive, for all! Namasté 🙏 Crypto Michael ⚡  The Dinarian

Read full Article
post photo preview
Dubai regulator VARA classifies RWA issuance as licensed activity
Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority (VARA) leads global regulatory framework - makes RWA issuance licensed activity in Dubai.

Real-world assets (RWAs) issuance is now licensed activity in Dubai.

~ Actual law.
~ Not a legal gray zone.
~ Not a whitepaper fantasy.

RWA issuance and listing on secondary markets is defined under binding crypto regulation.

It’s execution by Dubai.

Irina Heaver explained:

“RWA issuance is no longer theoretical. It’s now a regulatory reality.”

VARA defined:

- RWAs are classified as Asset-Referenced Virtual Assets (ARVAs)

- Secondary market trading is permitted under VARA license

- Issuers need capital, audits, and legal disclosures

- Regulated broker-dealers and exchanges can now onboard and trade them

This closes the gap that killed STOs in 2018.

No more tokenization without venues.
No more assets without liquidity.

UAE is doing what Switzerland, Singapore, and Europe still haven’t:

Creating enforceable frameworks for RWA tokenization that actually work.

Matthew White, CEO of VARA, said it perfectly:

“Tokenization will redefine global finance in 2025.”

He’s not exaggerating.

$500B+ market predicted next year.

And the UAE just gave it legal rails.

~Real estate.
~Private credit.
~Shariah-compliant products.

Everything is in play.

This is how you turn hype into infrastructure.

What Dubai is doing now is 3 years ahead of everyone else.

Founders, investors, ecosystem builders:

You want to build real-world assets onchain.

Don’t waste another year waiting for clarity.

Come to Dubai.

It’s already here.

 

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto – Support via Coinbase Wallet to: [email protected]

Or Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

Your generosity keeps this mission alive, for all! Namasté 🙏 Crypto Michael ⚡  The Dinarian

 

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals