Posts Tagged ‘Zelenskiy’

What The United States Must and Mustn’t Do

Saturday, March 12th, 2022

The new Red Line we must draw and enforce

I’ve listened with a great deal of patience and forbearance as various people in media and government have made the case for increasing US involvement in Ukraine.  I thoroughly understand the moral impetus that the suffering of the Ukrainian people invokes, and I also understand better than most of these commentators the potential costs of an expansionist Russia.  In 1985, I faced the satellite states of the USSR across the border frontier of walls, fences, minefields, razor wire, machine-guns, sentries, and the ever-present watchful eyes of surveillance from the East.  I was also there in 1989 when the wall came down, and in my estimation, West Germany too quickly embarked on the path to re-unification with their Eastern kin.  I watched in stunned silence as Western politicians ignored the potential dangers of unilateral disarmament in pursuit of phantom “peace dividends” through the 1990s.  I watched as these same leaders launched an assault on Yugoslavia under the banner of “peace-keeping” whilst pretending Slobodan Milosevic was Adolph Hitler, and enforcing a partitioning of that country, creating new states out of the remains of that nation.  I watched as the post-9/11 United States carried on one war, and launched another in pursuit of Weapons of Mass Destruction.  All of this I’ve watched, but never has any member of our government answered any of my questions or listened to my complaints.  Instead, they ruled without reference to the opinions or desires of the American people, but now they’ve placed us to be in position to fight a war potentially worse than any of us have ever known.  They are making their case using our emotions against us, but I’m having none of it.  If there’s something the American government must do, I can tell you what it should do, but also what it mustn’t do.  The answer to their current taste for war must be a resounding “no.”  Instead, if we believe the intentions of Russia to expand Westward are genuine, we must draw a new red line, but this time, we must prepare to enforce it.

Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and it doesn’t have any particular treaty obligations from or to the United States.  Like every other American, I look at the imagery coming out of Ukraine, and I feel badly for the position in which the people of Ukraine now find themselves.  On the other hand, Ukraine is not formally our ally, and despite the fact that our leaders over the last two decades have used our wealth to get them to carry out policies in their country that our corrupt leaders may have liked, they are not entitled to the defense of their country by the people of the United States.  It’s really as simple as that.  Ukraine is not a vital strategic interest for the United States.  For Ukraine, that’s the unfortunate truth.  All the rest is kaffee klatsch nonsense.

For those on the other side of this debate who claim that Russia is intent on expansionist designs, and that they should be stopped in Ukraine, I must dispute their assertion.  The answer for NATO, if we believe that Putin is building a new and improved Soviet State is not to defend Ukraine, which is now effectively lost, but is instead to begin building our defenses in the neighboring NATO states, to an extent and with a fervor that Vladimir Putin would never dream of crossing a new line that we should make unmistakably and indelibly red.  NATO has already shown itself to be unable and unwilling to defend much of anything, and it has fallen into disrepair on a scale that would be embarrassing if their leaders had any sort of conscience at all.  If you want to stand Putin down and limit his expansionism, then the way to do it is to immediately require all members of NATO to contribute four percent of their GDPs to the alliance, which would be a doubling of their current commitment that many are not now meeting.  Other defense spending should not be counted in that number.  When Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Poland, and all the smaller members of NATO along with the United States begin such a campaign to strengthen their defenses, training-up their forces, and conducting large joint-force training missions on a theatre-wide scale, it is very likely that Putin will stay put and go Westward no further.

Missile defense in the West must become a thorough priority.  The securing of shipping lanes and air-transport routes must become the norm instead of the exception.  We ought to be ramping-up a cold-war style notion of isolating the Russians, but also the Chinese Communists in Beijing, in precisely the same way we had done during the Cold War.  Yes, if we believe there is a real threat of expansionism on the part of Russia, then we must take the same sorts of steps that we had done for nearly one-half century.  This is not irrational, because if the threat is real, then this is the way we will ultimately be required to answer it in any case.  We cannot simply insert ourselves into the battle space of Ukraine, at this late date, expecting anything but the worst possible outcomes.  Russia may not be the Soviet Union, but it is still a lethal potential adversary, and its strategic nuclear arms have few parallels.

If the United States or one of its NATO allies, acting as proxies, should instigate a war with Russia through clear involvement in Ukraine, it would be an invitation to a catastrophe far worse than the one now playing-out on the ground in Ukraine.  Volodymyr Zelenskiy complained bitterly that this is all simply rhetoric, and that rhetoric cannot save his country.  It’s a very tardy realization from a man who’s been accepting rhetorical flurries as assurances from Western leaders, particularly from the United States.  He should have realized while conducting offensive operations against ethnic Russians in the Eastern provinces of his country, that at some point, as his government continued to poke the bear, the Russians were going to enter to find out if Washington DC’s substance matched its bellicose assurances to Kiev.  Those assurances were as empty as the treaty he had failed to obtain.  He should have sought admission to NATO after stabilizing the situation in the Eastern provinces.  Instead, at Washington DC’s invitation, he pursued a quick-and-dirty admission into NATO, like the con-artists who tries to purchase an insurance policy to protect his car after he’s wrecked it.  Seeing this coming, thanks to Biden’s administration placing this knowledge into the pipeline of intelligence through Beijing, Putin didn’t wait any longer.  Europe too has told him, via the European Union, that Ukraine won’t be permitted under current circumstances to enter that body.  He’s been cut loose.

Zelenskiy is running out of negotiating time.  Once Kiev falls under sustained attack, I believe Putin will close that window.  Even now, it will be Putin’s intent to encircle that city and cut it off from reinforcements and relief.   Once that’s complete, Zelenskiy’s bargaining chips will be few.  The best he might now obtain is to come to terms with Putin’s basic demands that Ukraine recognize Crimea as part of Russia, recognize Dunetsk and Luhansk, and basically write neutrality into the Ukrainian constitution.  In the longer term, I expect Putin to grab everything East of the Dnieper River.  I now believe Zelenskiy’s best remaining option may look like the orange line in the map below, yielding most of the territory East of the Dnieper, but it doesn’t change the fact that NATO must draw a strong red line if there’s any evidence at all that Putin’s expansionist ambitions are real:

This may be the best Zelenskiy can do

Those who shriek against this notion are relying too heavily on emotion, and too little on logic.  It’s undeniably the case that Ukraine has been sacrificed by the Biden administration.  The sensible thing for Zelenskiy to do now may in fact be to sue for peace and meet Putin’s terms.  It’s a terrible blow, but he must also be circumspect.  If he drags this out, it will be the innocents who suffer.  Putin should suffer for his actions, but in truth, so should the monsters in Beijing and in Washington DC who have enabled him.  Others in the region should think a great deal about this map, and particularly the red line I’ve drawn. If Russia is really bent on expansionism, every state west of that line, from Estonia in the North to Moldova in the South must take it very seriously.  If Russian intent is really to expand once again, then no nation West of that line should take the matter lightly. There were reports on Friday evening that Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett had advised Zelenskiy to accept Putin’s terms.  This is not a message from Israel, so much as it’s a message from Washington DC.

As for people to be taken lightly, now comes the DC war-crowd of people who are Republicans and fancy themselves “hawks.” This list includes a number of Washington Republicans who do their best to keep their swampiness on the down-low in campaign seasons.  They’re in favor of providing additional air-power to Ukraine, at least insofar as they want the Polish Mig-29s transferred to Ukraine, along with air-defense missiles and other air combat related resources.  These people are stepping directly up to the line, spitting across it, and daring Putin to spit in return.  Here’s the letter:

2022-03-10-senate-republicans-ukraine-letter-to-biden

This foolishness is the sound of morons stomping their feet in order to satisfy that segment of their respective electorates who think with uninspired and imprudent simplicity that “something must be done.”  Of course, it’s mostly nonsense, but to the degree there is anything serious about it, the Biden administration will likely do nothing to pursue meeting their demands, so that in the end, they’ll be off the hook with a “Well, we tried.”  The rest of the electorate, who opposes the war, either won’t see it or will forgive it when faced with electing a Democrat instead.  It’s that thing which is preferred widely in Washington DC:  A cynical but safe play. It’s another fan-dance.

The real answer to all of this is that there’s no reason of merit to send Americans into war in Ukraine, whether over land, by sea, or in the air, and no reason to militarily poke the bear.  It could be argued at this point that providing additional aid to Ukraine merely forestalls the inevitable, or even worsens what will be the ultimate death toll.  I’m not suggesting that Ukraine surrender, but their options are expiring.  Ukraine must make the best decisions for their own country that they’re able, but with every passing hour, the moment in which their leadership is deposed by warfare accelerates.  Zelenskiy may be a personally brave man, not fearing for his own life, but surely he’s not so motivated by bravado that he doesn’t understand his actual predicament.  The West is not coming.  They’ll be just as happy if the Russians take the place over entirely, disappearing Zelenskiy into a gulag or worse.  They simply have too much dirt to hide, so that placing it out of reach and under Russian control is simply too inviting a prospect to ignore.  Who more than Joe Biden himself hopes that Ukraine will simply go away?  Hillary Clinton?

The other question about the notion of American involvement in any conflict under current leadership comes down to a serious matter that we’re confronting daily, and will continue to confront us until Joe Biden is hauled out of office, whether by election results, impeachment, indictment or by an undertaker.  It’s one thing to have a figurehead reshuffling papers and executive orders, carrying out bureaucratic tragedies, but it’s something else again to have him conducting a war.  Troops in the field need to have confidence that their chain of command is complete, in good order, and of sound mind (politics aside,) but it’s entirely clear that this man is not capable of wartime command.  Frankly, neither is Kamala, nor is Barack Obama who is orchestrating all of this from his various bunkers and basements, whether in the Martha’s Vineyard, in DC, Hawaii or some billionaire’s yacht.  There is no situation under which the United States should seek combat of any kind while this man remains in power.  He’s simply not capable of it, and as a largely illegitimate president(one can claim otherwise, but that makes of them a liar or a dolt,) who has great difficulty conducting a press conference, there’s no situation in which he should be commanding the Armed Forces of the United States in time of war.  To send troops into harm’s way under such a commander-in-chief is an abominable idea, and I thoroughly condemn the advocacy of any notion to the contrary.  Only in such circumstance as the United States comes under direct attack should this man be in command of anything, and should it come to that, may God (or whomever you may worship) have mercy on your soul.

If we believe the threat of Russian expansionism is real, then we must begin immediately to act to stop it.  Our opposition must be relentless: We must arm the West as though we intend to actually fight to stop it, and we must remember that China and Iran must be included in any containment strategy.  These are every bit as dangerous to our nation and our way of life as Russia, and we mustn’t make any pretense to the contrary.  Even now, China is warning that the US shouldn’t seek to create a NATO-like organization in the Western Pacific, but that is precisely what we should be doing.  We should be getting together with South Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan for exactly those purposes.  In Europe, our red line must now become bold, but it must be drawn along Ukraine’s Western border.  Moldova, which has applied reportedly for membership in the EU ought to be offered the umbrella of NATO if the other members can now agree, and their Eastern border must be muscled-up as soon as possible.  Their time is already running-out, if expansion of Russia is the goal.  The fact that we’re not now looking ahead as to how we can strengthen NATO makes me question the claims of worry over Russian expansionism.  After all, if we really believe this is the intention of Russia, then we should be acting as though Moldova is the next step.  It should also be the case that if we believe that this is what Russia intends, we must immediately withdraw from negotiations with Iran in which Russia is acting as a deal broker.

Naturally, I don’t think that there’s any way the Biden administration will withdraw from these talks, just as I don’t believe they intend to stop Russia.  The real Russian Collusion is the Iran deal(JCPoA,) and it is the most important thing(to them) in which the Biden administration has been engaged since the beginning of the administration.  As long as they’re on the hook for that deal, they’re not going to make any real demands to or provocations against Putin’s Russia.  We’re being betrayed by the regime in Washington DC, and this fact more than any should turn Americans away from war on behalf of Ukraine.  Instead, if you want to direct your ire and bellicose denunciations at the real tyrants driving-up your oil prices in ways no other enemy could match, I can tell you their famous address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

It’s even on google maps…

 

Advertisements

The Crisis of Truth in Ukraine

Thursday, March 10th, 2022

What don’t they want us to see?

One of the problems you face in trying to discern what’s going on in Ukraine is the almost complete black-out of facts on the ground.  We’re simply not getting much information, and while we get reports of things that happen, many times, too frequently in fact, these reports are later debunked or revised in such a way as to make what’s really going on very murky and unintelligible.  On Wednesday, there was a report of a maternity ward in a hospital being struck by the Russians.  I’ve heard no follow-up reports, but I don’t consider the story factual until I see some sort of confirmation that it’s real.  We’ve all been burned too many times already in this conflict, by ridiculous fake news, almost all of it either for the Ukrainians, or against the Russians.  “Snake Island,” “Ghost of Kiev,” “I don’t need a ride, I need ammo,” “radiation leaks,” and on and on.  The number of false stories coming out of this conflict, combined with the complete lack of solid information on casualty counts on either side suggests a number of things to me, and all of it is that the gas-lighting is on an epic scale.  There’s no truth in any of this. On Wednesday, Bongino referred to the problem as a “Crisis of Truth.” It’s worse than that. We have a crisis of facts, due to a stunning lack of them.  Do we know the truth?  No.  Can we know the truth?  I don’t know, and I don’t believe anybody else in the West can tell you otherwise.  I’m going to tell you what I think is happening, and what may happen. I’m also going to tell you why I think it’s happening.  These are not facts, but they are educated guesses based on the slim facts we have.

Russia is grinding it out.  Things are not going easily for Russia, but unless something else changes markedly, they’re going to defeat the Ukrainians.  The invaders have all the material, manpower, and technological advantages.  Even Ukraine’s planes are aging Russian models.  Russia largely controls the avenues of approach into Ukraine, except in the most extreme West of the country, but again, the ability to move any substantial amount of supplies or war materials into Ukraine from the West will be severely hampered.  Russia clearly controls the areas along the Black Sea coast, so there’s no material by ship that’s going to make it in.  Even now, it seems the latest disposition maps I’ve seen suggest that Russia is slowly encircling the major cities, and the area East of the Dnieper River seems to be almost entirely in Russian control. Since this region is a majority-Russian-speaking populace, it seems as though Putin may have an increasingly firmer grip. In the far North, we know Putin already shares control of the Chernobyl nuclear plant site with the Ukrainians, just as he does now at the large power plant in the center of the country, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, located on the Dnieper River.

From the Russian perspective, securing the nuclear sites makes a good deal of sense.  Preventing saboteurs from turning nuclear plants into gargantuan dirty bombs is an important task any invader would be likely to undertake.  One would also expect that if the invaders intended to restore normalcy to an area after pacifying an area, they wouldn’t want to wreck the entire electric infrastructure.  Reports from other areas in the country likewise suggest that the Russian forces may be avoiding unnecessary damage to infrastructure, again suggesting they intend to restore normalcy quickly rather than over decades. This very much flies in the face of the narrative that Putin is a mad-dog wild-man intent upon razing Ukraine utterly to the ground.

Reports now suggest that upwards of two million Ukrainians have fled the country, most for refuge in Poland.  Ukraine forces are under-equipped, and highly demoralized.  Worse, some portion of their forces may have been encircled or nearly encircled in the Eastern section of the country.  On the other hand, the Ukrainians are fighting a defensive war, which means they have the advantage on the turf they still hold.

The issue that came to a head on Wednesday is the matter of biolabs in Ukraine.  There had been a fair amount of rumor-mill level information circulating around the Internet that suggested there were bio-warfare labs in Ukraine, and that Putin was going after them.  Let me try to clear the air on this, since certain conservative hosts seem not to grasp any of this material, while others at least recognize the implications: If there are bio-labs in Ukraine that have been handling dangerous pathogens, then Putin will certainly be able to make the claim, a la “Weapons of Mass Destruction” that he had a right to pre-emptively attack Ukraine to reduce/eliminate the threat.  What could the United States possibly say in opposition? “But Bruh, we’re the good guys…

There are those who have claimed, on behalf of the US government, that these labs are of a defensive purpose only, but let me be more honest: If you have the sort of research labs that’s handling Anthrax, you can just as easily weaponize your research products as not.  More, there’s information that one of the labs was collecting genetic material in which they were seeking only white Russian RNA for experimentation.  Why would a lab in Ukraine do that? That doesn’t sound innocent at all, and once you realize that the US Department of Defense was involved, one can’t understate the potentially diabolical nature of such research.  The fact that Victoria Nuland claims they’re now concerned about the disposition of the labs, and imputing a Russian offensive intent to capturing the labs suggests to me there’s something nefarious that has been going on in Ukraine.  Fifteen of these labs throughout Ukraine were being funded by DoD to at least some degree.  If, and I stress the IF, this turns out to be a collection of real biolabs with weaponization capabilities, then Russia has a legitimate claim that the United States was funding bioweapons on their border, and this would make US the bad guys. I cannot tell you how thoroughly disgusted I am with all of this.  These people, who funded the labs with our tax dollars, all of them, each and every one, needs to go to jail if there is any evidence of weaponization and weapons research for several reasons. First, that would violate the 1972/75 Biological Weapons Conventions. Second, it would likely violate US law.  Third, it could be seen as an act of war or certainly provocation of one.

The other thing I’ve been hearing reports from Ukraine include the fact that the Ukrainian forces are making combat emplacements among civilian homes and facilities in order to stymie Russian advances, knowing Russia is attempting to avoid civilian casualties.  The Russians have been making announcements in some areas, warning civilians to stay out of certain areas in which they intend to attack.  If the story of Ukrainian forces sheltering among or placing weapons among civilians turns out to be true, they are guilty of war crimes by using civilians as shields.

As for the role of the United States in the overall crisis, the following has become undeniably clear:

  • They don’t want to stop Putin yet…They may be looking for an opportunity to set-up Putin with a nuclear, biological, or chemical false flag
  • They will not provide Ukraine any significant weapons of self-defense
  • They’re happy to try to goad other NATO members into stepping into provocative territory
  • They want Putin gone, but they still need his help with the Iran deal
  • If they can’t control Zelenskiy themselves, they’ll happily cut him loose to the fate Russians have in store, if they don’t whack him themselves

One of the other things that’s really beginning to cause my eyebrows to raise is the lack of statistical data on the dead and wounded.  We received reports of incidents here and there, but isn’t it odd that the same media that kept a ticker on dead Americans in Iraq, and deaths and infections from COVID (but only while Trump was in office,) are suddenly disinterested in the statistics? One would think that if it’s all as brutal as we’ve been told, there’d be some sort of, dare I say it, “body count” for either side.  Instead, there’s nothing of the sort.  Given all the coverage of wars I’ve witnessed going all the way back to Vietnam, blaring announcers in grave voices stating the hard and ugly results of war in numerical terms has been a feature for as long as I can remember, until now.  Why should today be different, suddenly?  They ordinarily use these statistics to horrify us and to turn us against whichever war is being prosecuted at the time.  Why are they treating Ukraine differently?  It’s not that I’m a ghoul, but one of the unmistakable evidences of war is the grim reality of the wounded and the dead, and media has been only too willing to show them to us in the past.  I find it highly suspicious that we’re not being shown any of that in the war today.

More and more, as I listen to the coverage, I’ve come to wonder if we’re even given enough information to discern the truth on our own.  Ordinarily, the media gives us just enough to be able to figure out what’s going on, even if they lie entirely about an event’s actual meaning, as is their custom. Now, we get none of this. We get grainy footage, blurred by motion, or static pictures in which nothing is going on, and at most, we’re looking at an aftermath of something, but what happened there and who did it is obscured by time.  What we don’t get is any live footage of ongoing combat. The closest we get is something like an artillery piece, or other long-range or indirect fire weapon firing, with no context about where it’s occurring or what the target of the artillery fire might be.  Where are the media embeds with their satellite up-links?  In the modern context, this “coverage” simply isn’t.  They’ve also cut off all Russian media, so there’s no counterpoint of any kind, and no real-time footage coming from them either. The lack of video of the fighting give me the same feeling I had in the wake of January 6th when the Capitol Police would release little camera footage from among the 14,000 hours they had captured.  Why would you conceal it?

On the Ukrainian side of things, we now have the spectacle of President Zelenskiy accusing the West of doing nothing, which in some ways is definitely true, but what is galling to me is his demands that the West come to his aid.  Here is the spectacle of a beggar waving his fist at those he would have provide him charity.   When asked about the danger of escalation, he remarks that any such dangers are unknown or unknowable, and with that, we should simply ignore the risk.  At least for me, there’s something offensive about a country’s leader telling Americans that they’re to blame, and that he’s not worried about the blowback from any escalation on our country.  It’s just a little bit galling.  We’ve already provided much more support over the years than I would have approved, had I been given a choice. (Of course, that sentiment applies to many more nations than Ukraine.)  Here’s video from an interview by Sky News:

The accusations flying back and forth over the biolabs situation has not abated, and Psaki issued a blanket denial of US involvement in bioweapons labs in Ukraine, and called Russian and Chinese accusations of this “conspiracy theories.’  When Jen Psaki says a narrative is a “conspiracy theory,” you can be virtually certain that the opposite is true:

I think this is made plain, at least in part, by Victoria Nuland’s own remarks to Senator Rubio on Tuesday.  I’ll re-post the video here:

Notice that Nuland says there are concerns that these biological materials could fall into Russian hands?  Why would there be concern if there’s nothing dangerous there, as Psaki later claimed?

The question for Americans is rightly: Who’s lying?  It’s not a question any longer of whether you’re being fed lies.  The question is: Among all the liars involved, which of them is currently lying to you?  Maybe all of them are liars to some degree.  We can’t know, but the very fact that we need to speculate underlines the problem.  I don’t trust any of these people.  As I covered earlier, people I’ve trusted for a long time are now unreliable.  From the point of view of somebody covering this story, it’s a catastrophe.  There’s no way to know anything with certainty, and at least for the moment, it’s being kept that way. This crisis of facts is the underpinning of Bongino’s “Crisis of Truth,” and I see no evidence of the crisis relenting.

 

 

 

 

More Lies: Zelenskiy “Fight is Here” Was Never Said

Monday, March 7th, 2022

Zelenskiy visits rebellion’s front lines in 2019…(AFP)

The propaganda coming from our mainstream media is worse than one might ordinarily imagine.  Yes, we should expect propaganda to come out of both Russia and Ukraine in the middle of war, but we’re smart to give it time to soak before we accept it at face value.  Now it’s been revealed that Volodymyr Zelenskiy never actually said that quote that has been widely attributed to him.  The original source for the quote “The fight is here; I need ammunition, not a ride,” turns out to have been an anonymous “senior American intelligence officer.”  The Washington Post noticed this very thin sourcing, but Summit News did a little more digging. This is what they found.

We’re surrounded by media liars, and people feeding the liars in media. They all have an agenda that isn’t the truth, or your best interests.  We need to be very discerning, and our default setting must be one of intense skepticism.  As I reported earlier, allegedly conservative FoxNews and Newsmax have been caught carrying the DC Mafia’s water, so the number of “trusted” sources of information has rapidly dwindled.  Folks, we need to become the news.  Our own discernment is all that remains to protect us from disinformation, misinformation, fake news, and flat-out lies. As I explained last week, just as politics no longer ends at the water’s edge, neither do the lies.

Biden Administration Pushed Putin to Invade

Sunday, February 27th, 2022

He really DID do that!

It’s a story that could have been pulled from the pages of a Tom Clancy novel, except this isn’t fiction. As I suspected, the messaging of the Biden administration over the last several months has seemed at times either to goad or provoke a hostile reaction from Russia’s President-for-Life, Vladimir Putin.  It was no secret that Putin had designs on much of Eastern Europe, and to the degree he’s been able, he has managed to infiltrate the countries in the region, setting up puppets or regimes very friendly to his purposes.  When President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was elected, Putin was very unhappy, because it appeared Zelenskiy might be an actual, genuine reformer.  Worst of all, Putin didn’t have his claws in him, as has been his common practice.  At the time, Donald Trump was president, and Putin knew he couldn’t risk an invasion.  Trump had reportedly made the matter plain for the dictator, telling him those golden domes of the Kremlin would be demolished if Putin were to invade Ukraine.  This was not a man with whom Putin could trifle or hope to control, and despite the idiotic and false narratives being pushed in the US media, he knew he was stalemated for the moment.  Instead, he plotted for better times and opportunities.  He needed Zelenskiy gone, but he wasn’t alone in that desire.

One-fifth of the way around the world, another cabal was plotting Zelenskiy’s demise, but to them, the new President of Ukraine posed a threat of a different sort.  They’d been using Ukraine as their private piggy-bank, and money-laundering center.  The sons of top politicians had been employed in fields for which they had no experience, and no expertise.  Among them was Hunter Biden, a corrupt, drug-addicted sex-fiend, who seems to have had a fetish for prostitutes while in a crack-addicted stupor.  This has ever been the best kind of set-up for the extortionists in the Russian orbit, and they could add a carrot or two to the stick they would eventually wield.  Hunter was hired by the firm Burisma, at an astounding rate of $83,333 dollars per month. Best of all, it was a no-show job for which Biden would do exactly zero actual work.  Sons of Pelosi, Romney, and the step-son of Kerry would all dip into the water of Ukraine business ventures, and it was a wonderful way for the oligarchs involved to purchase favor with these American politicians.  The Clintons had done fabulously well with the oligarchs of Ukraine, their foundation having received more than ten million dollars  during the period between 1999-2014, all from particularly well-off citizens of, and NGOs operating within that beleaguered, corrupted nation-state.

Under Zelenskiy, some of this had begun to surface, but once Trump had been cheated of another term, Zelenskiy saw the writing on the wall and realized there’d be no further action on the matter.  The American gangsters were back in control, and no good for his country would come of pursuing the matter further.  Of course, none of this eliminated the stick that Putin held, because one way to get a seat at Putin’s table is to have powerful chips one can lie down; influence with Western politicians, whether in the form of favors owed, or extortionists’ leverage, serve as one possible price of admission to his inner circle of friendly oligarchs.

Everybody knew Putin’s aims with respect to Ukraine.  Why then, as Sundance over at TheConservativeTreehouse reported Saturday, did the Biden administration shove the notion of Ukraine’s entry into NATO into Putin’s face via intel provided to the Chinese?  This would predictably enrage the former KGB spymaster, and defender of the USSR.  Putin has long been understood to resent the era that began with Perestroika begun under Mikhail Gorbachev, and he was thoroughly disgusted with Boris Yeltsin, who he threatened and forced from office.  In Putin’s view, the assembly of so many new NATO members made up of former Soviet satellites was more than an annoyance.  It was a downright threat to his vision of returning Russia to the “glory days” of the Soviet Union.  Yes, in this way, Putin is truly a dangerous madman, thoroughly committed to the rebirth of the Soviet leviathan that had dominated all of his youth.  The notion that Ukraine would be permitted to seek protection under the umbrella of NATO was a slap to his face that he would never permit.   More, the operatives in the Biden administration would know that by sharing this with the Chinese, it would get back to Putin almost instantly, because the Chinese are very keen on seeing America, particularly, distracted by events in Europe as they prepare to take Taiwan. They would know Putin’s likely reaction to such information. The outcome of a Russian invasion was effectively engineered within our own government, and implanted via Beijing.

Soon after this revelation from the Biden administration via his allies in Beijing in early December, Putin had made his decision: He would move to invade Ukraine and mask his aggression under the thin veil of a “military exercise.”  All of the rest has been pure stage-show garbage.  The diplomacy was never genuine, and indeed, neither was it genuinely helpful on the American side. Biden stood before the presidential lectern, adorned with the trappings of his office, and effectively prodded Putin to invade.  He erased any notion of strategic ambiguity, letting Putin know the coast was clear, continually telling Putin via press conferences, our strategic position and intent, while also letting Putin what we knew or didn’t.  Biden (or the people controlling him) knew that there was no way Putin would tolerate even the discussion of Ukraine’s entry into NATO, and that among the ends Putin would pursue would be regime change in Kiev.

In point of fact, Biden openly attempted regime change in Ukraine too, though he took another approach: He offered safe transport and asylum to President Zelenskiy early Saturday morning. Had Zelenskiy accepted that offer, he would be effectively deposed, while Biden would look the compassionate hero, but Biden would have what he really needed most: An effective end to any threat posed by further disclosures or investigations from Ukraine about he or his son, or any of his friends in Washington DC.

The invasion is quite real, and the threat to Ukraine’s future is undeniable, but what lies behind these events is being concealed from your eyes by Western media.  Joe Biden should be impeached, because he is factually responsible for the precipitation of these events.  It is his administration that engineered this, but it tells me something more.  In order to provoke Russia to attack its neighbor, and to effectively sign Zelenskiy’s death warrant, the people within the Biden administration are clearly desirous of hiding more than Hunter Biden’s porn-stash.  These are the kinds of actions undertaken by a mafia-boss hiding extensive, organization-threatening crimes and prosecutions.  There must be much more in Ukraine than we now know.  Surely, there is extensive evidentiary linkage to Western politicians, in DC and elsewhere.  Time will tell, but at this hour, what is certain is that Biden’s administration had every intention of seeing this invasion happen.  It was their goal all along. Now we know how they actually engineered it. Many thanks to TheConservativeTreehouse for all of the in-depth digging.

For those who doubt any of this, I’d ask you to consider the laundry list of people who’ve been on the war-path. They’re all the same people who were engaged in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.  Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Adam Kinzinger, Lindsey Graham, Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Barack Obama, and of course Biden himself, along with various flunkies throughout the government.  Do you really wonder that this same collection of people, all deeply involved in the ridiculous leftist conspiracy theory and in SpyGate have all been deeply involved and increasingly loudly supportive of Ukraine, while simultaneously seeming to throw Zelenskiy under Putin’s bus? Some will call this mere guilt-by-association, but I would say that ignoring it is beyond naïveté. None of this is accidental, in the same way that the Biden’s convenient and timely disclosures to the Chinese were accidental.  This is the American mafia.  As Rush often said, “Don’t doubt me.”

Going to War With the President We’ve Got

Friday, February 25th, 2022

Shall we go to War with the President we’ve got?

Donald Rumsfeld once [in]famously remarked that “As you know, you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” This remark was accurate, even though it was widely and wildly criticized by leftists who have no understanding of national defense. The sentiment is easy enough to understand: You do not always get the luxury of preparing endlessly for war. Sometimes, the need to go to war supersedes your ability to abstain from or delay it for more ideal conditions or state of readiness.  Sadly, this is sometimes true of presidents as well. If the United States were to be attacked suddenly by nuclear strikes originating in Russia, for instance, it really wouldn’t matter who the president at the time might be.  That president would be expected to respond with equal or greater ferocity, irrespective of party or politics.  The problem we now face as a country borders on the galactically absurd.  We have in the Oval office a foolish, apparently dementia-addled old man, who is apparently not in good control of his bowel, never mind his mouth or intellectual capacity. He ought to be removed under the 25th amendment, come what may, but the people who’ve been using him as their meat-mask have no intention of seeing that happen.  We are in mortal danger, but under this President, Joe Biden, we cannot risk any unnecessary wars.  It is the height of unconscionable madness to permit it. I realize that sometimes, a country must go to war with the president in charge at the time, but this is not that situation, and I condemn any who would suggest otherwise.  No, we must not now go to war with the president we’ve got.

Ukraine is under attack by a hostile, monstrous actor.  Vladimir Putin is despicable, but he also has the advantage of owning the superior forces over the terrain in question.  It’s not a matter of caring, because any person can look in horror at the Hell Putin now imposes on the people of that stricken nation and understand the misery they now suffer.  It’s a matter of practical reality.  We are in no position to do anything unless our answer is a nuclear first strike against Russia, but that’s an intolerably bad option for all of the obvious reasons.  We have no significant bases nearby from which we could operate the number of air sorties needed to put up any sort of sustained defense of Ukrainian airspace, though it is possible we could park an aircraft carrier battle group in the Black Sea.  That’s an extraordinarily risky proposition when you intend to poke the Russian bear within easy reach of their air assets.  We are poorly positioned, and Putin knows it. He’s been watching and assessing NATO for decades.  He knows our NATO allies have barely maintained their responsibilities in the alliance.  He knows they’ve all been cheating.  He knows they are all incredibly weak, and weakened more by their oppressions of their own populations as part of their COVID responses.  He knows they’ve repressed their own dissidents, and he can legitimately throw the political dagger of “hypocrisy” at them with no trouble.

He also knows that America is now weak, with obviously weak and ineffectual leadership that is more concerned with punishing their own countrymen than in prosecuting a war in a country most of the corrupt US leaders would sooner see destroyed, in part to hide their corruption over decades. Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and Mitt Romney along with their adult children and many others in the DC cocktail-party circuit would be only too happy if Ukraine’s current leadership came to an obscure and quiet end.  Between 1999-2014, the Clinton foundation carted over $10 million dollars from the oligarchs there.  They’ve used it as their personal piggy-bank for more than two decades, laundering money in and out of that small and easily corrupted country.  Their current president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, is apparently an actual reformer, and none of them can tolerate that, particularly Putin, who has used it as the base from which to compromise Western politicians, particularly Americans, none of whose names are Trump.

The only question in Washington DC is how to play it for maximum waggage. (As in wag-the-dog.) None of the people now in charge in DC have any intention of rescuing Zelenskiy.  The truth is that they want him gone for all the same reasons Putin does. He can’t have Zelenskiy or his reformer government burning his purchased assets in Washington. It’s better to make it all just go away, and to bury any evidence or witnesses with it.  Others had suggested that the Russian “Invasion of Ukraine” narrative had been an entirely invented story line to give Biden a moment to talk and act tough to distract from the massive failures of his administration, but as facts on the ground now demonstrate, the threat was always very real.  Maintaining an Army in the field is expensive, and the larger the force, the more expensive and difficult it becomes. When it was clear that Putin had more than one-hundred-thousand troops deployed along the borders of Ukraine, it became clear to me that this was more than idle bluffing.

It could be observed that the pronouncements from both the White House and the State Department seemed almost to goad Putin into attacking.  On the one hand, they made threats that all parties knew were idle, while on the other, they openly admitted their inability and unwillingness to do much to stop it. “You’d better not, or we’ll kick your ass, even though we’re in no position to do so, and really don’t have the resolve to do so,” they effectively blustered and admitted at once.

There’s one other issue I’d like to tackle, and it’s with those who seem to be insisting “we MUST do something.” This element doesn’t seem to like that the vast bulk of the American people seem understandably to have no interest in doing much about the situation in Ukraine.  Polls seem to suggest that something like thirty percent of Democrats and twenty percent of Republicans believe the US should have any significant role in Ukraine.  To this element in our country, I suggest they take a look around and smell the crap they’re shoveling.  One, a radio host I have always liked, pointed out for the second consecutive day that after all, ours is a volunteer military, as if that means something to the argument for going to war, and he’s right, it does: A volunteer military requires the people to follow orders just like a conscripted military, with the difference that what makes that volunteer force viable is their understanding that their chain of command will not make frivolous or futile use of them. It’s one of only a couple of times in my history of listening to Mark Levin that I very nearly turned him off. I know there are dolts who have come to believe, inexplicably, that the killer Putin is some sort of good guy in disguise, but I’m not one of those, and Mr. Levin ought to be more careful before he begins to conflate America First patriots with these.

I don’t know what’s in Mr. Levin’s head when he says a thing like that.  I was a volunteer too, when I was fortunate enough to have a great commander-in-chief in President Ronald Reagan.  Neither was he without flaws.  Eight days before I reported for Basic Training, 241 servicemembers – Marines(220), Sailors(18) and Soldiers(3) – were slaughtered in Beirut.  When I went through boot camp, the mostly Vietnam combat veteran drill instructors all believed we were inevitably going to war.  We believed it too.  They drilled us like it, and they trained us with a vigor and intensity prior classes that year probably hadn’t experienced.  They were tough as nails, maybe more than usual, because they believed we trainees would be called upon to go to Lebanon.  That call never came, but I believe to this day that every one of us who graduated that training cycle were beneficiaries, because they more scrupulously got rid of the duds, pushed us to the physical, emotional, and intellectual limits, making us better soldiers.  The point is that President Ronald Reagan did not send in more Marines, Sailors, or Soldiers.  In point of fact, he pulled them out.  When that was the result, I remember that the sentiment in the military community was not all that happy about it.  Nobody wants to see their fellow servicemembers slaughtered, particularly to no purpose, and definitely without punitive response.  At the time, it didn’t sit well, even though it was potentially our necks on the line had Reagan sent more troops instead of withdrawing them.

In the longer run, however, I came to take a more mature view of what Reagan did, or more properly, didn’t do.  He evaluated the terrain, he looked at who we faced, and what the probability would be that more troops would merely make for more concentrated targets, far from home, to be attacked by small groups or individual suicide bombers where the mission was already murky and hadn’t borne the expected fruit. He looked at our allies in the region, and how he might augment and support the mission, and finally decided there wasn’t an attainable military objective that could be reasonably achieved without unreasonable losses.  In short, President Reagan made an entirely rational choice.  He likely wanted retribution against them as much as any of us. He wrote the hundreds of letters to wives and mothers and fathers and children.  He knew the unambiguous costs. Strangely, I would later intersect with Reagan’s foreign policy again, in April 1986, when a Berlin discotheque was bombed, killing US Servicemembers.  It was a strange turn of events that led my unit to serve briefly as replacements in Berlin in September of that year. Reagan did exact a punishment on the bad guys in this case, being Ghaddafi and his ring of terrorist henchmen, within ten days sending a bombing raid to Tripoli that nearly got the “Colonel.”

My point in all of this is that it’s very easy to look at the situation in Ukraine and desire to be able to put a stop to it. The sickening truth is that when we pretended, starting with President George HW Bush, that there was some “peace dividend” to be obtained from the end of the Cold War, it was foolishness, and an instance of utter stupidity that only anti-military pukes like the Clintons could love.  They exploited it, too.  Rather than realizing that the “peace dividend” from the ending of the Cold War was peace itself, we pretended that we could reduce our defense spending.  Adjusting for inflation, to spend at our Cold War defense-spending peak in 1986, a year in which we spent an astounding $295 billion, in today’s dollars, we should be spending roughly $1.2 trillion.  Instead, in 2019, we were spending roughly $740 billion.  At the turn of the century, after two terms of Clinton, we had fallen to $320 billion when we ought to have been closer to $500 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars, and the percentage of GDP expended on our military had fallen from 6.63% in 1986 to 3.11% in 2000.  Even now, we’re only slightly better, at 3.41% of GDP, as of 2019, so that we’re at slightly more than half as much military spending as a percentage of our GDP than we had been in 1986, a time when many, myself included, believe the US Army was at or near its peak in training and morale. (See stats here.)

Europe is far worse. Trump was not only right about European nations’ contributions to NATO, but their underlying defense expenditures are cratering. Since Trump left, they’ve fallen off a cliff, with reports that the German Army couldn’t deploy sufficient forces to repel successfully much of anything.  In short, Europe has left themselves virtually defenseless, with the brief exception of the period of Trump’s presidency, with only new NATO member Poland substantially upholding the promise of expending at least two percent of their national GDP on defense.  The United States has been bearing the burdens of defending Europe for most of a century now, yet we cannot get them to pay to defend themselves, and there is no will under the current administration in Washington DC to hold NATO’s feet to the fire. In 2020, Germany barely attained 1.57% of its GDP in defense spending, and that was after extensive prodding from President Trump. When he took office, the Germans were spending roughly 1.1% on defense.  In short, don’t look to Berlin for help.

This is the realistic assessment of the terrain in Europe: NATO has fallen into severe disrepair, from the end of the Cold War, until Trump came along to prod them beginning in 2017, but has since fallen back into the same rut, with the blame naturally being placed on CoVid19. At this point, the United States should be telling NATO: “That’s it. We’re cutting you off. We’re bringing home our troops unless you get to your spending goals AND make up for all the years of shortfalls within the decade.”

Of course, we’re no more likely to get that from this administration that we are to have a competent president, never mind commander-in-chief. More, this administration is incapable of waging an effective war of any kind, anywhere, at any time. They’ve diverted our military into concerns with all things “woke,” and if you think this is Ronald Reagan’s military of 1986, technology notwithstanding, you need your head examined.  Quickly.  Yes, of course we still have some good war-fighters in our military, but they’re now a pathetic minority within the ranks, and in the officer corps, they’re getting pretty thin as the service academies have been infiltrated by more and more social justice schlock, as modern “education” theories take precedence over what had traditionally worked.  I would like you to watch the first six and one-fourth minutes of this episode of Bannon’s War Room. In those first few minutes, he presents what he calls his “cold open,” and in it are various clips, including three recruiting ads, one for NATO, one for the Russian Army, and one for the US Army.  If you don’t see the problem, again, you need your head examined:


Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve been reporting to you the state of our nation, and more generally, or our globe in one way or another for more than a decade at this web address. While my posts have been more infrequent in recent years, it’s not for a lack of concern.  People are foolishly insisting now that “we must do something,” but look at the state of our country.  I ask them: What would you have us do?  We have feckless leaders, corrupt and intransigent to the suffering and travails of the American people.  We have a military that, but for a brief reprieve under Trump, has been diminished and demolished, it’s morale wrecked along with its ethos.  We have a corrupted Justice Department that behaves as the hitmen for the government mafia.  We have an FBI that actively plots to entrap citizens, in shenanigans of that agency’s complete contrivance and invention.  We have a Department of State that openly plots against elected presidents it does not like, and we have an intelligence community that actively seeks to surveil and undermine a president it did not and would not obey.  We have an opposition party that barely musters any sort of fight against any of this, in large measure because they’re not really opposed.  We have public health officials who collude with big pharma to poison the American people and hide the data. We have whole segments of the population committed to destroying the country from within, including local officials, many bought-off by globalist pigs like Soros and Schwab.  You actually expect, in this condition, and in this state of being, that the remarkably few American people who realize what is going on, to volunteer their children into a war on behalf of this? Of this???

Do not tell me that we must go to war with the President we’ve got. I’m heartbroken at what I’ve seen thus far from Ukraine, like any other compassionate, thoughtful human must be.  I know that Putin’s mission is to exterminate Zelenskiy and his entire cabinet. His intention is to expunge them from the face of the globe.  Worse, the scumbags running Washington DC have every reason to help him do so.  There’s too much evidence of their corruption over in that tiny country.  There’s too much evidence of how they were controlled from the Kremlin. They don’t want to save Zelenskiy or Ukraine.  They want to bury Zelenskiy and his cabinet, they’re willing to burn Ukraine to the ground to do it, and they’re helping Putin carry it out.  Meanwhile, the American economy is spiraling into a stagflationary period that will make the Carter years look like a boom.  (It was once a joke that Jimmy Carter was thankful to Obama, and then Biden(but I repeat myself) for knocking him from the top of the “worst president’s ever” list, but nobody’s really laughing any longer. We’re in freefall, and every sensible person knows it.)

In the midst of all of this, those of you who wish to “do something” need to get a grip on your emotions, and understand what we’re really up against now.  We’re fighting for the survival of this country, right here, right now.  That great wealth or influence might offer insulation to some is no excuse for the indifference in the sentiment contained in the idea that Americans are somehow defective if they don’t wish to rush off to war against Vladimir Putin in Ukraine.  We know it’s another nasty set-up, just like all the ones deployed against us here at home.  We know the score.  We know, because every damned “conspiracy theory” (or most of them) of the last two decades have been proven mostly true.  We know Zelenskiy is the good guy.  We know.  Meanwhile, we listen to buffoons like Lindsey Graham, whose military experience consisted of walking papers around a Judge Advocate General’s office, pontificate about the privations we will suffer due to this crisis.  It’s not enough as it is, you see; Goober would have us suffer more.

Now I have to endure a berating monologue from a radio host I have long supported because I’m in no hurry to see my younger, ill-prepared brethren in uniform sent off to do something somewhere? For what purpose? To what end? For the sake of the need to “do something?” No sir.  I will not support going to war with this class of criminals who run our country. I will not support the spilling of so much as one drop of their blood on behalf of these cretins.  They’ve spent decades demolishing the country, and it’s not just the Democrats, though they’re today the mob bosses in charge.  When we had a president who was not part of their mob, they tried, like the gangsters they are, to take him out in any way that they could.  They used their vast criminal enterprise, posing as lawful suits at the bar of corrupt courts, undermining the integrity of our election, all because Trump had to go.

Years ago, I counseled young people to serve a term of enlistment in the military if their life plans were not firm after finishing high school. I told them it was the best thing they could do for themselves, while also serving their country.  It was true in my time, but it hasn’t been for most of a half-generation.  Even in Trump’s time, the military was already thoroughly undermined from the top, ever since Obama purged the Generals now more than a decade ago.

I truly do feel terribly for the Ukrainian people.  I know that like most ordinary people everywhere, they simply want to be left to live their lives, mostly in peace.  I know their current president is a reformer, and if it were possible, I would try to rescue he and his countrymen from the Russians.  The problem is that it is not currently possible.  More, the people running this country don’t actually want it saved.  I am as powerless to change that today, in the here and now, as any other American.  Shall we overthrow this government so that we can retroactively spend the defense dollars we should have spent, and undo all the stupidity and malfeasances of the last three decades? How will that help Zelenskiy?  More, we didn’t raise a credible effort to overthrow this government when it conspired against the President we elected. We didn’t raise a credible effort to overthrow this government when it obviously conspired with various state and local officials and NGOs to steal our presidential election and elections for lower offices.  It’s not merely Joe and Kamala who are illegitimate. Chuck Schumer is illegitimate in his leadership position, because neither Mark Kelly nor Rafael Warnock, among others, actually won their races.  Nancy Pelosi is illegitimate, because there were at least a half-dozen closely contested races that were likely impacted by the same cheating.  Do you really believe John James lost his Senate race in Michigan?  I don’t.

No, Mr. Levin, don’t tell me we should spill blood or treasure, no matter how strongly we might feel about it, for the sake of Ukraine or President Zelenskiy.  Until we spill all the blood and treasure needed to rescue our own fallen nation, don’t dare speak of it to me. You haven’t earned the right.  If you wish to characterize me as America First, as though it were a slur of some kind, so be it. I’ll stand by it. Don’t worry, I won’t burn any of the autographed books that fill half a shelf, in part not only because I hate book-burners and wanton, pointless destruction, but also because, with the way things are rapidly heading, I may need them soon for that purpose to cook my supper. Shall we go to war with the president we’ve got?  Respectfully, that depends on the contextual meaning of “with,” sir.  With him in Ukraine?

Hell no.

 

Editor’s Note: I’ve been a big fan of Mark Levin for a long time, and in the past, I’ve contributed to the Landmark Legal Foundation, of which he served as President for several years.  I don’t mean here to personally attack Mr. Levin, but I fail to understand his point of view on this particular issue. I always feel badly when I find myself at severe disagreement with the Great One, but on this point, I will not demur.  Our country cannot now defend itself, and its leaders prevent its agents and officers from defending even our Southern border.  They file suits at law against states, like my own, who attempt to enforce the laws of the United States, and even when ordered by courts to do so, effectively play a stalling game, and a game of “you can’t make me” with federal judges who dare to rule against them, up to and including the Supreme Court. So long as we have a lawless government, I support only wars of immediate existential circumstances for the United States. I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, and it does not expire, no matter who now has claimed the authority to ignore it.