Category Archives: defense policy

Trusting Russia on Ukraine

Posted on by
Reply

The US and Russia, along with NATO and Ukrainian officials, talked about setting up a peace-keeping force to get and maintain peace in Ukraine.  Interestingly, that force would be placed along the front that separates the Russian and rebel-held eastern Ukraine from the rest of the nation instead of being on the Ukrainian border with Russia.  The proposal also carefully ignored the status of Russia-occupied Crimea.  A US counterproposal, offered by the US’ chief negotiator, Kurt Volker, suggested that the force should include, also, that border—not instead of the front—while still ignoring Crimea.

During a panel discussion held by a number of former US diplomats that included Mike McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia and Volker, McFaul asked Volker

Tell us why the factors are different in this particular case that would lead to a different scenario than a permanent division that we have in Cyprus[.]

Volker’s answer?

Mr Volker said the peacekeeping plan would only work if both the Ukrainians and Russians want peace.

Who’s definition of “peace?”  Russia doesn’t want peace except on occupation of eastern Ukraine, retention of Crimea, and control over rump Ukraine.

Volker is a rabbit remonstrating with a Russian bear. Volker thinks the Russian ways are wrong. Russia thinks Volker is lunch. He’s embarrassing us.

Costs, and Costs

Posted on by
Reply

The fight to drive the Daesh out of Iraq (while killing too few of them IMNSHO) has caused more than $45 billion in infrastructure damage to Iraq.

That’s roughly half the cost of the damage a couple of hurricanes did in Texas and Florida last year, an even smaller ratio when Puerto Rico is figured in.  But it’s a lot of damage for a nation like Iraq.

What might that imply, besides the relative wealth of the two nations?

One is the relative dependence we have on our more highly developed, and so expensive, infrastructure compared to Iraq.  Iraq is scraping by with that level of damage and already beginning to recover.

If we suffered the same relative level of damage to our infrastructure, particularly our electric grid, how well would we fare?

A Sandbag Attempt

Posted on by
Reply

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff (D, CA), in response to the Committee’s Republican members’ four-page memo—the Nunes Memo—regarding the FBI’s abuse of FISA court-approved surveillance of Americans, produced a ten-page Progressive-Democrat member response, which the committee voted unanimously to release to the House with an eye to getting the memo released to the public via the White House’s security vetting.  The House approved the release and sent it to President Donald Trump, who had five days to disapprove the document, or it would be released.

Concerns that the Progressive-Democrat members had larded their memo with information that, if released, would jeopardize intelligence and FBI methods and sources in order to make political hay over their redactions have been justified.

The White House on Friday told Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee to redraft their rebuttal to a controversial GOP memo alleging government surveillance abuse during the 2016 campaign, saying sensitive details need to be stripped out before the document can be made public.

It isn’t simply a refusal to release the memo with its cynically included classified information, though, nor is the White House playing guessing games with the Progressive-Democrats about what would be releasable.  In a letter advising the committee that the Progressive-Democrat memo could not be released in its current form, White House Counsel Don McGahn wrote,

However, given the public interest in transparency in these unprecedented circumstances, the President has directed that Justice Department personnel be available to give technical assistance to the Committee, should the Committee wish to revise the February 5th Memorandum [the Schiff Memo] to mitigate the risks identified by the Department.  The President encourages the Committee to undertake these efforts.

Notice that.  It’s not a refusal to release at all, as the committee’s Progressive-Democrat members had voted to do with the Nunes memo.  It’s a refusal to release with the deliberately included classified material and a willingness to release with those data removed by the Progressive-Democrats in coordination with DoJ.

And the Progressive-Democrats are busy growing their political hay.

The Secretary of State for Defense Is Correct

Posted on by
Reply

Two Daesh terrorists who grew up in Great Britain have been captured.

Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson told the Sun newspaper on Saturday: “I don’t think they should ever set foot in this country again.”

Williamson is absolutely correct.  Barbarians like this, who think terrorism is the way to go, should be allowed freely to leave to join their barbaric gangs.

And then they should be barred from returning.  Forever.