Playing Russian Roulette–With Russia

W.J. Astore

Reckless and Stupid

What is the point of playing Russian roulette—with Russia?

As the Biden administration fades into oblivion, among its last decisions has been to allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russia with U.S.-made ATACMS, a missile with a range of 300 kilometers (190 miles). Ukraine’s recent use of these missiles brought a worrisome response from Russia: hypersonic intermediate-range missiles. If Ukraine persists in striking deeper into Russia with U.S., British, and French missiles, the Russian response will be proportionately greater, and possibly escalatory against NATO.

Here’s the thing: These missiles are too few in number to have a decisive impact on the course of the war. Ukraine isn’t going to “win” by launching ATACMS and similar tactical missiles. Yes, they can inflict more pain on Russia, hitting targets like ammunition dumps, military bases, and the like. But nobody is pretending these are war-winning weapons. All they promise is more dead bodies on both sides.

In World War I, new weapons were often introduced because it was believed they would prove decisive on the battlefield, weapons such as poison gas (1915) and tanks (1916). Of course, the other side adapted fairly quickly and the war dragged on, but at least there was a sincere belief that new weapons might break the awful stalemate of trench warfare.

There is no such sincere belief today. The main objective seems to be to complicate matters for the incoming Trump administration and its stated goal to end the Russia-Ukraine War. To that end, the Biden administration is using all means at its disposal to send the remaining $6 billion or so in weapons and related aid to Ukraine before Trump’s inauguration in January. Even anti-personnel mines are included in the mix.

Here’s how Antony Blinken put it:

President Biden is committed to making sure that every dollar we have at our disposal will be pushed out the door between now and January 20. 

We’re making sure that Ukraine has the air defenses it needs, that it has the artillery it needs, that it has the armored vehicles it needs.

If only the Biden administration had been so committed to helping Americans in need.

In playing Russian roulette with Russia, Biden and Blinken have demonstrated unconscionable levels of recklessness and stupidity.

An incredibly reckless and stupid “game”

Bombing Another Country for Peace

W.J. Astore

Yemen, Israel, Ukraine, and the U.S. Embrace of War Everywhere

Last night, the U.S. bombed another country, Yemen, in the name of the “rules-based order.” Yemen has been striking shipping as a form of protest against the ongoing Israeli genocide-in-slow-motion in Gaza. It always looks good when the U.S. uses its military to enable mass murder elsewhere. I’m sure the “peace bombs” we dropped will bring stability to the region.

The U.S. military bombs and launches Tomahawk missiles as its answer to everything. Meanwhile, our dynamic commander in chief, Joe Biden, launched a new front in this war of terror without Congressional authorization, an impeachable offense. But of course most in Congress will salute him for taking “decisive” action by bombing yet another poor country with brown-skinned Muslim people living in it. Perhaps Biden is counting on being a “wartime president” as a way to eke out a narrow victory in November.

In Gaza, incremental genocide continues with at least 23,000 Palestinians dead and another 60,000 wounded, the majority being women and children. The Israeli government is poisoning the land and water of Gaza, blasting buildings into rubble, and starving the Palestinians while still claiming to be the victims of the war. Antony Blinken, America’s diplomat-in-chief, says the war will end when Hamas offers its unconditional surrender. After which, what, exactly? Israel will rebuild Gaza and embrace Palestinians as brothers and sisters?

Israel is going to rebuild all this for the Palestinians in Gaza?

In Ukraine, the war continues to be stalemated as Ukraine waits for another $65 billion or so in aid from the Biden administration. Which brings me to this story from The Boston Globe this morning:

More than $1 billion worth of shoulder-fired missiles, drones, and night-vision goggles that the United States has sent to Ukraine have not been properly tracked by US officials, a new Pentagon report concluded, raising concerns they could be stolen or smuggled at a time when Congress is debating whether to send more military aid to Ukraine. 

Over the last two years, the U.S. has flooded Ukraine with weaponry, producing a stalemated war and a healthy black market in stolen arms. The next step should be obvious: persist in the same folly by sending Ukraine even more weapons. Again, the argument is made that it’s all Russia’s fault and that, if Putin wants the war to end, he should basically surrender by withdrawing all Russian troops from the territory he has seized.

There you have it. The annihilation of Gaza will stop when Hamas totally surrenders and the war in Ukraine will stop when Russia totally surrenders, otherwise the U.S. must keep sending more than $100 billion in weaponry and aid to the “democracies” of Israel and Ukraine in their righteous battles against evil. Yes, that really is the position of Biden and Blinken.

Finally, a reader sent along this important article on how the U.S. is funding these wars and in fact the entire war on terror: by deficit spending. Call it “the ghost budget.” America’s national debt has ballooned to $34 trillion mainly due to the disastrous war on terror (roughly $8 trillion), colossal Pentagon budgets, and gargantuan bailouts of banks and corporations due to financial and Covid crises, real or constructed. Vast wealth continues to flow upwards in America as Biden’s “everyday people” struggle. Whether for Biden or Trump, the answer to the debt is always more tax breaks for the rich in the name of “stimulating” growth. Those tax breaks, of course, only drive the national debt up further, but never mind that.

What’s coming is a concerted attack on social security and Medicare/Medicaid in the name of fiscal responsibility. As the comedian George Carlin predicted: They’re coming for your social security. And they’ll get it, he added. Which is consistent with what Joe Biden has said in the past about the need to cut social security as well as health and veterans’ benefits.

Happy Friday, everyone.

What’s the best way to end a war?

W.J. Astore

Sending more weapons to Ukraine isn’t the answer

U.S. foreign policy is a place where logic goes to die.

Antony Blinken, the U.S. Secretary of State, said yesterday that the quickest way to end the Russia-Ukraine War is “to give Ukraine a strong hand on the battlefield,” by which he meant more and more weaponry, including Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles and Patriot missile systems together with Challenger II tanks from Great Britain. Not surprisingly, then, the White House also hinted at yet another aid package for Ukraine, which may be announced “as soon as the end of this week.”

A “strong hand” for Ukraine?

Logic suggests the quickest way to end a war is to stop fighting. Announce a cease fire, negotiate, and find acceptable terms for an armistice or peace treaty. Stop the killing—stop the war.

Of course, the U.S. State Department is really a tiny branch of the Pentagon. It’s been that way for decades. The Pentagon budget, $858 billion for this year, is 14 times greater than the State Department’s at $60 billion. It often seems that a primary mission of the State Department is to market and sell U.S. weaponry overseas. Small wonder that Blinken sees more deadly weaponry in Ukraine as the answer to ending a catastrophic war.

In a way, Blinken’s blinkered thinking is typically American. What’s the quickest way to end a war on crime? A drug war? Or almost any other problem in America? Obviously, more guns, more security cameras, more metal detectors, more body armor, and so on. Think about our “solutions” to gun violence in schools, which include armored backpacks for eight-year-olds and semi-automatic pistols for teachers. Too many Americans look to guns as a “solution” to life’s problems; count Blinken among the gun-lovers, at least when it’s in the form of U.S. arms exports.

While it’s true U.S. arms exports and aid may keep Ukraine from losing quickly, it’s highly unlikely these same weapons will help Ukraine to win quickly and decisively. Russia can and likely will match any escalation to this war, and at a cheaper price than the U.S. taxpayer is currently paying (now over $100 billion and rising).

Blinken’s bloodless language about war is also revealing. It’s all about giving Ukraine “a strong hand on the battlefield,” as if Ukraine and Russia are playing a polite game of poker. More weapons to Ukraine means more bloody death and destruction; attrition or even escalation is far more likely than a quick end in Ukraine’s favor.

Blinken probably knows this, but a large part of his intellectual training was spent at Harvard and Columbia Law, just as Jake Sullivan, his younger counterpart at the National Security Council, trained at Yale and Yale Law. These men aren’t stupid, they’re just narrowly trained and partisan functionaries willing to spout whatever the empire needs them to say in the cause of imperial hegemony.

And so U.S. lawyers continue to send guns and money to Ukraine, especially guns, while saying this is the best and quickest way for Ukraine to beat Putin and end the war with Russia. Logic, however, suggests more fighting and dying and a lack of decision for either side.

Best not confuse a “strong hand” with a dead man’s one.