Posted on 10/26/2022 7:27:32 PM PDT by Cathi
Congress should signal its readiness to invoke the War Powers Act, while demanding that the Biden administration broker peace.
Douglas Macgregor Oct 24, 2022 1:00 PM
As the astute author Hunter S. Thompson noted, “When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.” Weird is indisputably the condition in Great Britain, where Liz Truss, an arguably empty and talentless prime minister, is out—and was, it seemed for a moment, very nearly replaced by her vacuous predecessor, Boris Johnson.
Weirdness, however, is not foreign to American politics. An indicator of just how weird Washington is becoming is the apparent interest in General (ret.) David Petraeus’s recent suggestion that Washington and its allies may want to intervene in the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev.
According to Petraeus, the military action he advocates would not be a NATO intervention, but “a multinational force led by the US and not as a NATO force.” In other words, a U.S.-led Multi-National Force on the Iraq model composed of conventional ground, air, and naval forces.
Petraeus does not explain why U.S. military action is needed. But it’s not hard to guess. The intervention is designed to rescue Ukrainian forces from defeat and presumably compel Moscow to negotiate on Washington’s terms, whatever those terms might be.
Admittedly, the whole business seems weird, but Petraeus’s suggestion should not be dismissed. Not because Petraeus’s military expertise warrants consideration—it doesn’t. Rather it merits attention because Petraeus would never make such a recommendation unless he was urged to do so by powerful figures in Washington and on Wall Street. And as Jeffrey Sachs tells Americans, globalist and neocon elites clearly want a direct armed confrontation with Russia.
For Petraeus, it is business as usual. He rose through the ranks by checking with everyone in a position of authority above him before doing anything. Seeking permission to ensure no one in authority is offended (like a “coalition of the willing”) is key to promotion. It works well in peacetime, or during wars of choice against weak, incapable enemies that present no existential military threat to Western forces. But Ukraine is not Iraq nor is the Russian Army an Iraqi-like force, or mounted on “technicals”—pickup trucks with automatic cannon.
These points notwithstanding, Petraeus’s suggestion confirms two critical insights. First, the perilous state of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Absent the foreign fighters and Polish soldiers fighting in Ukrainian uniform, Ukraine has little left to withstand the Russian winter offensives. The series of Ukrainian counterattacks over the last 60 to 90 days have cost Ukraine tens of thousands of lives, human capital in uniform that Kiev cannot replace.
Second, it is the 11th hour. The Russian sledgehammer scheduled to fall on the Zelensky regime in the November or December timeframe, or whenever the ground freezes, will crush whatever remains of Ukrainian forces.
In other words, Petraeus’s real message is that the only way to prolong the life of the Zelensky regime is for Washington and its coalition of the willing to intervene directly before it's too late. The usual war hawks in the White House, the Pentagon, the CIA, and on the Hill probably assume that a quiescent American electorate will buy the argument that the commitment of U.S. forces in Ukraine without a declaration of war could facilitate a face-saving deal with Moscow.
It's dangerous and stupid to think so, and Americans should reject this notion, but it’s not unreasonable to assume this deluded thinking is prevalent inside the beltway. George F. Kennan, American diplomat and historian, insisted 30 years ago that, “We [Americans] tend to overemphasize military factors at the expense of political ones, and in consequence, overmilitarize our responses.” The result, Kennan argued, is Washington’s chronic failure to relate the development and use of American military power to attainable ends of national strategy.
In Washington’s halls of power, the “going in” assumption always presupposes certain conditions: a subservient Congress that will ignore its responsibility to invoke the War Powers Act, unconstrained financial resources for military action, and senior military leaders ready to comply with whatever dumb idea the politicians in charge advocate. For Petraeus and his peers there is also the high probability that some tangible reward is promised in the form of future appointments or financial gain.
The questions of how much ground combat operations in Eastern Europe and Ukraine would demand in terms of U.S. manpower, logistical infrastructure, ammunition, medical support, and evacuation are relegated to secondary consideration. For example, in the 11 months after the landings in Normandy, when the U.S. Army was sustaining 90-100,000 casualties a month, the divisions that landed at Normandy replaced 100-300 percent of their fighting strength.
The commitment of U.S. ground forces to battle combined with the dispersion of U.S. military power at the end of a 5,000-mile lifeline across Ukraine, an area the size of Texas, will unavoidably weaken and dissipate the attacking army’s fighting strength. Finally, Petraeus’s critical assumption that President Putin wants to avoid a larger war is no doubt valid, but this assumption should not be interpreted to mean the Russian military opponent will treat U.S. bases in Western Europe or U.S. warships transiting the Atlantic as inviolate. Moscow enjoys escalation dominance, not Washington.
As noted at the beginning, weirdness in politics is not a new phenomenon. Then again, Petraeus’s remarks signal something far more troubling than mere weirdness. The intellectual and professional caliber of America’s senior military leaders is deplorable. In his landmark work, August 1914, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn described Aleksandr Samsonov, the Russian general who at the beginning of the war was renowned as the leading strategist of the Russian Army: “The truth was that his forehead was solid bone, his mind moved at a snail’s pace, and the thoughts that passed through it were worthless.” Solzhenitsyn’s words were harsh, but not inaccurate.
In Ukraine going forward, Washington’s path is clear. Congress should do its duty and signal its readiness to invoke the War Powers Act, while also demanding that the Biden administration broker peace, not expand the war.
Pepe Escobar:
“Special relationship” on crack:
Crash Test Dummy’s handlers and “Rashid Sunuk” (copyright Dummy) agreed over the phone to continue weaponizing Ukraine and CONFRONT CHINA.
bkmk
This is what they wanted from the beginning. It’s never been about Ukraine, of course.
They will manage this the same way they managed the Afghanistan withdrawal, with incompetence and impulsiveness writ large.
‘Only in a Mad Sick World ft, former CIA Analyst Larry Johnson’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRgiKHfoSPw
From "we'll take Kyiv in three days" to "there will be bitter and hard defeats". pic.twitter.com/vkMVQoMobE— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_en) October 26, 2022
The War Powers act isn’t applicable until US military gets directly involved.
And Congress approved the Military Aid to Ukraine in a vote that had full Democrat approval and 2/3’s Republican approval.
🇺🇦🇺🇸CIA Director Bill Burns secretly visited Ukraine in early October - CNN
The publication writes that he met with President Volodymyr Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials.
At this meeting, Burns assured Zelensky that Washington would continue to support Ukraine in the confrontation with Russia, writes CNN. Particular attention was paid to the exchange of intelligence.
The trip took place at a time when the US authorities began to express concern about the possible use of nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine.
-Ostashko!
The US has decided to accelerate the delivery of atomic bombs to Europe - the first delivery expected in the spring of 2023 is now scheduled for December
The United States is accelerating the deployment of B61-12 tactical atomic bombs in Europe. Already in December of this year, the first batch should be delivered to NATO bases on the European continent. The United States explained such a pace of deliveries of tactical nuclear weapons once again as “Russian aggression”.
“Given the rise of Russia’s nuclear rhetoric, some of the allies have asked for continued consultations with NATO to ensure continued readiness and consistent messaging,” the Pentagon diplomatic document says.
Despite the recognition by the White House that Russia has no plans to use nuclear weapons during a special operation in Ukraine, the United States deliberately continues to stir up the situation around this type of weapon. At the same time, a Pentagon spokesman said that the modernization of European weapons is planned, and of course it “has nothing to do with current events in Ukraine and has not been accelerated.”
-Readovka
Neither the disgraced Petraeus nor the manic McGregor have anything of value to add to the conversation about Ukraine. Their opinions are more about their personal ambitions than anything else.
Patraeus lost to savages in sandals and now is going to redeem yourself by trying to win against Russia? Napoleon’s hat is too big for him:)
Yesterday I posted the MacGregor interview from Judging Freedom and at the end MacGregor does a very funny imitation of the General during his last conversation with MacGregor (over Iraq.)
As a few freepers probably know Petraeus just came out and suggested that the U.S. outside of NATO (obviously because NATO would never go along with it...:-) along with a “coalition of the willing” (Poland, maybe a Baltic, etc.)... to use Bush’s phrase... militarily go into Ukraine and join the fight.
This particularly worried MacGregor because he said Petraeus would never come out publicly with the U.S. going to war without getting approval all the way up the chain first. MacGregor sees this as a “trial balloon” to test acceptance of the idea (and also pointed out we are in no shape to take Russia on now.) Incredibly dangerous and stupid idea, but our leadership is incredibly dangerous and stupid...:-(
Hope the common sense will prevail.
“Hope the common sense will prevail.”
_______________
Unfortunately, not a chance...:-(
An “emotional” Duran wake up call.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9zHrF0Vr9M
Ukraine Admits Kherson Offensive Slowed, Russia Repels Attacks, Putin Chairs Coordination Council
Russia is our competitor on the global stage, and today areas historically allied with them such as Syria, Libya... are contested. Even Venezuela (also a major oil producer), allied with them, we would love to do regime change in (of course for democracy, freedom, human rights and sovereignty).
At this point, forget Ukraine, that’s not what this war is about.
By fueling a bitter war like Ukraine, we are depleting a competitor. Russia is diverting resources from their frontier areas to Ukraine.
Example: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-russia-exclusive-idUSKCN1PJ22M (from a few years past).
Their military forces are under enormous stress with their FSB being laregly engaged in Ukraine, as are their airborne forces, special forces, mercenary group (comparable to what we called Blackwater years ago)... Even Russia’s allies who are not entirely internally stable such as Chechnya are sending troops in large numbers to Ukraine. There is substantial material depletion.
We put Russia in an aweful position where war with Ukraine was very likely in October 2021. NATO membership by Ukraine would have been a security disaster for them and that is exactly what we did: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/. Not sure why people were shocked or surprised when Russia invaded.
Ukraine is not going to take back what was lost. They lost this war already by both political and military measures. Politically Ukraine is not going to be a NATO member, what this war is about. And even EU membership which was in scope is today no longer feasible. Likewise, it was always known that Russia would seize the ethnic Russian areas if they invade, and that they did. They took most of what they wanted and that includes a major port city and industrial area.
Keeping this war going today is our call, just like offering NATO membership to Ukraine and causing it in the first place was. So what would be the point of keeping this going even though Russia already attained their military and political objectives, if there is no reasonable hope of Ukraine taking back the lost land? Attrition and pressure.
At this point it’s about keeping the pressure on. Stretching the Russians thin, putting their armed forces under operational stress, depleting their material, redirecting their forces, security forces and Intel from their frontier (Syria, Libya, Venezuela...). The Russians are simply not that big as a conventional force: ~55% our Army 43% our USN, and 47% or our USAF. Going in with ~190,000, and now maintaining about 150,000 troops in Ukraine + Intel, police, etc is putting a HUGE stress on their armed forces.
Ukraine has put Russia in a very weak position on the world stage, something we benefit from. In a global context, for us, Ukraine is a battle, not a war. The Russians may have won that battle, but they are going to lose the war.
Ukraine was a win-win for us. We win if Russia acquiesce and let’s Ukraine in NATO, we still win even if Russia invades - we just win elsewhere.
Interesting post and I agree with you on a lot of it. But, I disagree on the conclusion you reach...
“Ukraine has put Russia in a very weak position on the world stage, something we benefit from. In a global context, for us, Ukraine is a battle, not a war. The Russians may have won that battle, but they are going to lose the war.
Ukraine was a win-win for us. We win if Russia acquiesce and let’s Ukraine in NATO, we still win even if Russia invades - we just win elsewhere.”
The United States government (currently known as Deep State) are the HUGE losers here which will be a big win for the American people whose biggest current enemy is that government’s “new world order” “one world government” “globalization” which is already destroying this country and has additional fascist plans for us if they maintain power.
As far as being in a “weak position on the world stage” we Americans have got to get over the idea that the West is the world stage. Truth is a large part of the actual world is sick of our demanded hegemony (750 U.S. military bases in 80 countries) and in ever increasing numbers is signing on to a multipolar world. The number of BRIC+ applicants is increasing on a monthly basis. Africa firmly supports Russia, even South America does. China, India, Turkey, most of Asia.
It’s true that the U.S. purpose for instigating this war was to weaken, destabilize Russia and bring about regime change. That foreign adventure turned out to be another Biden failure. Europe is in the process of being destroyed economically. The U.S. is severely weakened economically. Russia is doing fine. They have what the world needs; we have “vapor paper.”
This ain’t winning...:-)
Germany Needs Billions Solve Energy Crisis, Struggles to Sell Bonds
Germany has found reluctance in its potential debt buyers, amid markets racked with uncertainty about interest rates and state spending.
According to Reuters, demand was weak at a recent auction of German government bonds on Tuesday, but other auctions have been “very, very, very bad”, said Michael Leister, head of rates strategy at Commerzbank, likening the situation to a “buyers’ strike”.
The pessimism appears to have arisen just as Berlin was seeking billions in order to address the ongoing energy and cost of living crisis.
Congress should do its duty and signal its readiness to invoke the War Powers Act, while also demanding that the Biden administration broker peace, not expand the war.
FReepers don’t want to hear any this nonsense. It’s always PROVOKE AND ESCALATE! PROVOKE AND ESCALATE!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In before the Chamberlain pictures. It is not appeasement to be in favor of peace negotiations. Ukraine should ask for negotiations while they have an advantage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.