Better in their words…

We’ll start with a story that’s getting a fair amount of attention—and deservedly so, as it makes clear how despicable the Neocons and our ruling class generally really are. MoA (Moon of Alabama) does a very good job on this reporting:

Ukraine’s Demographics Again Dictate To End The Fight

The neoconservatives have launched their probably last attempt to save their project in Ukraine.

Edward N Luttwak @ELuttwak – 13:42 UTC · Mar 16, 2024

In Ukraine the age of conscription is 27, that is when people have started to work & have children. Naturally not many show up. Now they are discussing lowering the age to 25, still absurd. 18 is the right age, with bodies of growing strength. The Ukraine army is much too small

Following Luttwak’s urging, a neocon Senate stooge jumped in:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called on Ukrainian lawmakers Monday to quickly pass a mobilization bill that would make more citizens eligible to be drafted into the military, and he sharply questioned exempting men under 27 from the fight.

…

“We need more people in the line,” he said.

Which reminds us of the old Lone Ranger joke, with Tonto asking: What you mean we, white man?

MoA goes on to discuss Ukraine’s demographics in detail, but here’s the short version:

Neither Luttwak nor Graham seem to have any knowledge of Ukraine’s demography. I pointed out six month ago that there are hardly a significant number of 18 to 25 year old left in Ukraine. If that cohort gets further diminished by senseless dying Ukraine’s future will be even more bleak than it is now. Even the British nuts who earlier proposed to draft 18 year old Ukrainians have learned to shut up about it.

And here’s a grim assessment from the former Polish Chief of Staff:

The former chief of the general staff of the Polish army, General Raimund Andrzejczak, told the Polsat television channel.

 “I believe that Ukrainian losses should be counted in millions, not hundreds of thousands. There are no reserves in this country, no one to fight with. Ukraine is losing this war. The situation is very, very dramatic,” he said.

If knowing the role of the American Empire in the death of Ukraine doesn’t turn your stomach …

Will Schryver has a string of excellent tweets and retweets to day. First a longish one by Glenn Diesen. Diesen doesn’t put it exactly this way, but as master of the bleeding obvious I would add that our ruling class cynically foment “fear and hatred of the other” for the purpose of their own power politics. I would also add this caveat: Russia has not fully recovered from the tragedy of the 90s—recovery from such a trauma is not so easily or quickly achieved. But Russia has turned itself around to head in the right direction—thanks in large part to Putin’s leadership. America decades ago turned in the wrong direction and has no visionary leaders who can command the national respect that Putin has in Russia–in itself that fact is symptomatic of the misguided direction we are headed in. Who in public life dares speak the full truth, openly?

Glenn Diesen @Glenn_Diesen

I always cautioned my IR students: Do not hate your opponents, it produces poor analysis!

– As I read the ridiculous/cartoonish media coverage of the Russian election, I get the feeling of our own downfall. Unable to live in reality and unable to place ourselves in the shoes of the opponent – how are we supposed to have sensible analysis and policies?

Wow! “the feeling of our own downfall. Unable to live in reality …”

– The human instinct to divide into groups of the virtuous “us” versus the evil “other” derives from evolutionary biology – it creates group loyalty required for security against extent threats. However, it undermines reason, the ability to assess objective reality, and the need to see the world from the perspective of the opponent.

– In the 1990s, the Russian economy and society collapsed with horrific consequences. Security also collapsed as NATO expansion meant cancelling the agreements for an inclusive European security architecture (Charter of Paris for a New Europe / OSCE), and NATO could bomb Russia’s ally Yugoslavia in violation of international law. It was common in the West to expect that Russia would share the fate of the Soviet Union and collapse.

– Today, Russia is the largest economy in Europe (PPP), its society has healed from the disastrous 1990s, its military might is restored and new international partners have been found, and Russia’s international political standing (outside NATO) has also recovered as Russia now chairs the BRICS+ club. Given that this was not Russia’s path when Putin took over the presidency, should we not address how this happened?

– So why is it not possible for politicians, journalists, or academics to acknowledge any of the great socio-economic, security and political achievements of Russia? The simple answer is that any acknowledgment of Russia’s achievements over the past 25 years is treated as “supporting” Putin, which is criminalized across the West. Arguments are not assessed by the extent they reflect reality, rather arguments are assessed by whether they are seen to express support or condemnation of Russia – and your statements must reflect support for “our team”. We are obligated to deprive the opponents of legitimacy, which limits what we are allowed to discuss.

But there’s another way to answer the question that Diesen asks. Is it not possible that acknowledging Russia’s very real achievements—themselves indicators of fundamental strengths as a society—would be an implicit indictment of our own failings as a society? I repeat. Russia’s recovery is not complete, but it has been significant. And Russian society is willing to listen to a leader who speaks frankly and truthfully.

– How can a Western journalist then inform its audience about Putin’s immense popularity and election victory when it is not allowed to say anything positive about the Russian president?

– People conform to the good versus evil mantra as it feels virtuous and patriotic to signal that they support the in-group and loathe the out-group. But how can we pursue our interests when we have committed ourselves to self-delusion and have banned reality from our analysis?

– I have attempted to explain for two years why the anti-Russian sanctions would fail and why Russia will win the war, only to be told that it is Russian propaganda to undermine support for sanctions and to challenge the narrative of a pending Ukrainian victory. Reality be damned!

– Russia’s democracy has many flaws, as for example strong men and cliques should be replaced with strong institutions. But can anyone honestly say that the Western media has not detached itself from reality?

Well, look at our own societal and political institutions. How strong are they now? Isn’t Trump’s appeal largely based in the sense that our institutions have failed us as a people and a nation? That they have been subverted by shadowy, swampish oligarchs—one hardly dares call them “strong men”—and cliques?

We pivot to the Red Sea and military matters!

From a longer tweet, which speaks eloquently re Western “leadership”:

Lee Slusher @LeeBTConsulting

Strategic ambiguity requires strategic capabilities. Otherwise, it’s just make-believe.

Macron’s irrepressible desire for political relevance does not translate into real power. Pretend leadership from a pretend leader.

Follow the link in the second tweet for multiple graphs illustrating the truth of what Schryver says—as we were saying just a few days ago:

Will Schryver @imetatronink

The Biggest Geostrategic Development the West Doesn’t Want to Talk About

Iran, in concert with its Yemeni allies, has effectively become the gatekeeper of the Suez Canal and the Strait of Hormuz.

In normal times Suez handles 20% of world shipping.

Joakim Hannisdahl @JHannisdahl

Updated data on #shipping #SuezCanal transits via the #RedSea

Re the US military—preparedness and response to strategic challenges. Again, this confirms what we quoted Prof. Mearsheimer saying very recently—most Americans have no clue of what deep trouble we’re in in the Middle East. Highly recommended—follow the link and read more comments:

Will Schryver @imetatronink

Only the USS Vinson is fitted out for F-35Cs at this time. They’re still trying to “work out the kinks” of F-35 operations on the USS Washington. The Vinson recently took a brief cruise from San Diego to the western Pacific and back again. Its air wing is now in stateside hangars undergoing major maintenance.

Quote

Armchair Warlord @ArmchairW

It occurs to me suddenly that we haven’t seen F-35Cs flown against Yemen. Every single video that has emerged from the Navy has shown a Super Hornet strike package. x.com/Minrusken/stat…

8:23 PM · Mar 18, 2024

The BBC yesterday featured an interview with the USN Captain who commands the destroyer group that protects the USS Eisenhower against Houthi attacks. Reading between the lines I see the suggestion that our naval forces are feeling mission stress and fatigue. The USN is having increasing difficulty keep multiple carriers on duty:

US Navy aircraft carrier faces relentless battle against Houthi attacks

It’s not just merchant ships being targeted by the Houthis in the Red Sea. The US carrier strike group trying to protect them has also been under constant threat too.

…

Captain Wroe lists the threats they’ve been facing over the past four months: anti-ship ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, unmanned surface vessels, and now unmanned underwater vessels, or UUVs, all loaded with explosives.

…

Captain Wroe says the Houthis have posed the greatest challenge to the US Navy in recent history.

“This is the most since World War Two,” he says. That was the last time the US operated in an area where they could be fired upon every day.

The tempo of operations on the aircraft carrier itself has also been unrelenting– with dozens of sorties being flown round the clock.

…

Rear Admiral Marc Miguez, the Carrier Strike Group commander, sees the signs of continuing sea trade as evidence their presence has had some success.

He believes strikes led by the US, with the help of Britain, have already degraded some of the Houthis’ military capabilities. But it certainly hasn’t deterred or stopped them.

…

Admiral Miguez says they’ll stay for “as long as we’re needed”.

But there are limits to sustaining this level of military presence.