WASHINGTON, DC – JULY 21: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)
How unfortunate it is… No!
How SAD it is… to be writing a post that Prudence hopes will be – can be – read later than September first of 2022. Does that sound extreme? The worries of a foolish patriot? Maybe YOU are not paying attention.
Nancy Pelosi, relatively un-American Speaker of the House for only the crassest, most selfish reasons (those who have repeatedly voted her into the Speakership have always done so for their own, temporal, financial, re-election benefits and not those of their constituents) has decided to “visit” our Asian “friends,” indeed, leaving on the trip today, July 30, 2022. Prudence hopes that this date does not mark the beginning of the end of the United States’ independence.
Part of her itinerary, perhaps for some good reason that escapes the grasp of most thoughtful observers, was announced to include a visit to Taiwan, an island nation with a most unusual history, coveted by Communist China since Chiang Kai-Shek fled the mainland at the end of the Communist Revolution. The communists, in keeping with their world views, intend to fully absorb Taiwan, even as they have absorbed artificial islands they’ve created above various reefs in the South China Sea.
For several decades known as the island of Formosa, from a name bestowed by Portuguese explorers, Taiwan has never been a comfortable fit with the rest of Chinese Dynasties, experiencing numerous rebellions, particularly by indigenous Taiwanese, mostly populating the mountainous central spine of the island. “Formosa” even existed for a few months as an independent Republic, following the Sino-Japanese War, in 1895. Japanese rule also didn’t last very long. Until the Nationalist Chinese under Chiang Kai-shek invaded and dominated the island in 1949, there had never been solid Chinese control of Taiwan (“Taoian” to its natives). During the mid-1600’s the Dutch East India Company fought Han Chinese repeatedly for control of shipping and trade on the Pescadores islands near Taiwan, and control of Taiwan, itself. They, too, were driven out.
All in all, control of Taiwan has only in the past 70 years been Chinese, albeit Nationalists. The Communist mainland government has at least as legitimate a claim as the Nationalists, having defeated the Nationalists in 1949. Only the support, explicit and implicit, of the United States, strong allies of the Nationalists against the Japanese in WW-II, has prevented Communist China (“PRC”) from taking over. U. S. affinity for democratic republican governments, and for the strategic value of Taiwan specifically against the PRC, and our virtual economic and military dependence on imports from BOTH the PRC and Taiwan, forces the U. S. to attempt continued threading of the needle between the two nations.
China has made its intention to take over Taiwan clear; the U. S. has replied in muddled, ill-defined terms of “support” or “defense” of Taiwan. Under Joe Biden, who always seems to back down when pressed by the PRC, China may perceive that there will never be a better opportunity to make a strike on Taiwan. This should make everyone who voted for Biden for President and those who intentionally covered up his corrupt connections to the Chinese Communist Party, ashamed of their role in weakening the U. S. against the only country/empire that can not only replace the U. S. as the dominant force in the world, but, should we back down on Taiwan, push us out of the Far East as a trusted ally for anyone.
What are the possibilities if Nancy DOES stop off – or attempt to – in Taiwan? None looks good, but we need to look around the world for other conditions in the summer of 2022 to understand the list of possible consequences.
China is watching the Russian crimes against Ukraine very carefully. What has ”the West” done to counter the Russians? Did NATO – the U. S. in particular – STOP the Russians? Well, no, we shrank back when Russia rattled its nuclear weapons. We have provided lots of weapons, not always timely, but eventually, and we appear to be content to let Ukranians die in their own defense. The U. S. does not appear to be ready to die alongside them. There is no particular reason why the U. S. would have the will to do anything different for the Taiwanese… at least, that is likely the logical deduction of the Chinese.
Then their question has to be: “If we attack Taiwan, will the U. S. do anything differently from what they’ve done for Ukraine?” One wonders if anyone in OUR country knows the answer to that question.
But, the Chinese are both cautious and operating on a longer schedule than biennial elections in the United States. Somehow the visit to Taiwan by the American Speaker of the House has presented a golden opportunity to China. If a few blusters by the CCP can keep her from visiting, there is something to learn about U. S. resolve. If she does visit, that is also something to learn.
But, but, but… what if she takes the challenge and decides to attempt to land on Taiwan in the face of the PRC’s telling her – and us – that she can’t go there without PRC permission? Will the Communists perform their show of force as threatened? Just as Pelosi may feel that she has to go to Taiwan, the Chinese may feel that they have to carry out their threats. Now, Chinese fighters and U. S. fighters are in the same airspace with Chinese pilots acting aggressively. One of them, or more, slides within the defined safe zone of the Speaker’s plane and Americans fire a warning shot to back them off. The Chinese, who already threatened to fire warning shots in the run-up to the conflict, fire their own warning shots but an American plane, if not the Speaker’s plane, is hit. The Americans shoot AT the offending Chinese plane and it is forced down or the pilot is forced to eject.
Talk about supply chain interruptions. The Chinese could invade Taiwan as soon as the Speaker lands, or sooner! Too bad if Americans are hurt or die. The U. S. sinks an aircraft carrier. It’s going to be a very difficult Christmas.
Do we even know what we are doing – the U. S. Navy that is firing people for not accepting those dangerous and useless mRNA injections?
Or, the Speaker decides to not visit Taiwan. Everyone is all smiles as she returns to the U. S., but the end of U. S. enforced “freedom of the seas” is upon us, and history will have changed for a century or more, all to America’s disfavor. This is a real pickle. The Chinese could decide at that point that the U. S. is comprised of wimps and LGBTQx+ people who are too confused to fight for our country, and certainly too afraid to fight for any other: Taiwan is invaded. Forty countries will abruptly stop playing nice with the U. S. and begin ignoring dollars. Life becomes extremely unpleasant inside our borders. Even welfare may have to be cut back! God forbid.
Prudence observed, recently, that 2022 would be “the” year. It would be the year that is the fulcrum of history, thought Prudence Leadbetter, and every passing hour appears to confirm that prognosis. Not only is it a mid-term election year in the United States, but war has broken out in Europe, Canada briefly descended into fascism over Covid vaccine mandates, and China could finally decide it’s a good time to smash Taiwan. Why should Putin have all the fun?
Americans are going to have their first opportunity to balance the scales after having allowed a most questionable election to install the worst administration in a long lifetime. There are many questions as to what the consequences of current events may ultimately be, and people have a right to ponder the hundreds of possibilities. Let’s consider a few.
How long and how large will the Russo-Ukraine war be? In one view, the best result is a quick victory for Russia and Vladimir Putin. That will stop the fighting and provide some satisfaction for the Russians, probably stopping their adventurism. On the other hand, the Ukrainians are not interested in being part of Russia, again, and are fighting ferociously for their land, families, homes and neighbors. Europe and the U. S. are belatedly providing ammunition, supplies and armaments to Ukraine to whatever degree they can be transhipped to a nation at war for its life. Without a doubt, the take-over of Ukraine is not proceeding, for Putin, as he intended. This has made him less rational; he has placed his nuclear forces on “high alert.”
Had the first desired scenario worked out: rapid collapse of the Ukranian government and surrender of Ukranian forces in a few days, perhaps with Zelenskyy fleeing in fear, then Russia could clamp down on Ukraine, start making nice with its NATO neighbors and the world would adjust, amidst grumbling and sputtering, to a new reality. Putin would be left stronger inside Russia and on the world stage.
However, the second, more dangerous scenario may be playing out. That is that Russian brutality must increase to the point of war crimes, if not already there, and even if successful in crushing Ukranian resistance, Russia is left a pariah nation and Putin, if he retains power in Moscow, will lose face and influence and any semblance of trust around the world. Russia will be sanctioned by loss of trade, particularly in oil and gas, weakening it nationally, and possibly reducing cooperation with bordering republics. NATO will be strengthened. Amidst this messier turn of events, Putin might do something really stupid… something that draws the United States into direct conflict. God forbid.
Another question; Will Democrats attempt even more blatant election fraud to hang onto power in the 2022 midterms? Despite the inability to prosecute any of the most questionable results, an inability built into the distributed nature of Presidential elections, there are many questions, including Constitutional ones, that no court, including the Supreme Court was interested in hearing, about the conduct of elections in 2020. Nor did any state want to reverse its certification of electors when that would place them on the ”outs” with a new administration controlling the flows of dollars to state budgets. It can all be “blamed” on the fear of Covid-19, but the extra-legal changes to voting practices in 2020, were THANKS to Covid-19, not fear of it.
That 2020 experience should be instructive to Americans: the Democrat Party is willing to subvert both standards and laws to retain its hold on power. The desperation they felt in the face of a most-likely re-election of Donald Trump and his exposure of the deep state bad actors who participated in the attempted destruction of the Trump presidency, was enough to encourage that party to attack election laws in many states, permitting vote-by-mail and unlimited absentee voting, vote harvesting and numerous other weakenings of voter identification. There is evidence of international electronic connection to voting machines that were, ostensibly, not legally internet connected, and within that illegal action, evidence that foreign actors created blocks of votes that were “dumped” into the electronic records of key states when it became obvious that Trump’s majority would be larger than they had planned to overcome. They got away with it and Biden’s electors were certified.
What, then, are Democrats prepared to attempt in November of 2022?
Next question: Will China seize on Biden’s weakness to attack Taiwan in 2022? Despite its obvious use of Covid-19 to weaken other nations, China is not yet the pariah it should be, internationally. Many countries are beholden to China for “development” loans they have “paid off” with grants of industrial, raw-material, or military access to their resources, land or coastlines. Many western leaders are becoming richer through Chinese-led corruption, the greatest of which is the Biden crime family, followed closely by Nancy Pelosi’s husband and Mitch McConnell’s wife. Hundreds of millions of Chinese dollars enter the U. S. political arena through universities, non-governmental organizations, various non-profits and relatively direct political contributions through straw donors. Politically, America is compromised. It is a Chinese strategy that is well-known and well-ignored by our “elites” and the political class.
Does China believe the time is right to move on Taiwan? We’ll find out, probably around Labor Day. They, and Democrats, will perceive that crisis as politically positive for Democrats. God forbid.
Will there be a banking or currency crisis in 2022? The question hinges not only upon the long-term desire of Russia, China and Saudi Arabia and others to unseat the U. S. dollar as the universal and reserve currency, but also on the oil and gas global trade – something in which President Biden has severely weakened the U. S. position and influence. It’s almost as though he intended to damage the U. S. economy in as many ways as possible. Be that as it may, trade dollars, or “petro-dollars,” in practice, became the standard for international conversion for most trade. This status has also made it possible to create dollars (of DEBT) whenever the U. S. felt like it, which, since the Great Society began, followed by Nixon’s closing of the gold conversion “window,” in 1973, is virtually every budget year. The government used to borrow in times of war or depression, only – during actual crises, in other words. However, since the federalization of welfare, there has been a “crisis” nearly every year.
The U. S. has “borrowed” something over $30 TRILLION dollars, since then, without ever attempting to pay it back. In return we have seen fit to act as the world’s policeman and foreign-aid piggy-bank. With the fall of the Soviet Union and general maintenance of stability in global trade and relative peace, sort-of, for the U. S., the rest of the world went along with America’s debt creation and erosion of dollar-value, and our de-facto empire, but the system has grown tiresome and the U. S. has grown less reliable. Plus, in our soft-hearted / soft-headed immorality, we have gained many enemies that we refuse to recognize or even describe, many of whom are unmoved by stable trade. Indeed, some have brought America to virtual surrender regardless of the hundreds of billions of military dollars and thousands of lives we have “invested.”
Fewer nations trust us as allies than did 50, 30 or even 10 years ago, possibly than did even 4 years ago. Precious few will defend our economy when China and others decide to pull the plug on the dollar. What will that mean? To start, look at the labels on things you buy.
Many of our vegetables and fruits come from other countries, for example. If the international standing of the U. S. dollar evaporates, what will we use to buy that produce? If South and Central American nations, New Zealand, Southeast Asian nations start to require Chinese renminbi for trade, where will we get some to trade with? Buy them with our own dollars? Why would China want them? Sell some gold to China? Sell some, ahhh… what, to China? Land???
The U. S. has been acting like an international social-service agency for decades. This has fitted with the leftist view because it weakens the dominance of the U. S. A. We have agreed, repeatedly, to buy products to help smaller, poorer nations. We have agreed to offshore manufacturing to, mainly, China, but also to several other nations, including in Europe. We’re such nice, friendly folks. Now, we haven’t sent fast-food “manufacturing” to other countries, so maybe we could trade hamburgers for our fruits and vegetables. Eh, probably not. French Fries, maybe. In our dense “wisdom,” we have already sold off a lot of farmland and food processing to China. That sounds smart.
Much of America’s power is wrapped up in our position in the global banking system. Most nations store their gold in New York, for example, with international transactions performed on handcarts between vaults a few yards apart. Most currency exchange rates are based on the U. S. dollar, secondarily on the British pound sterling, a remnant of the British empire’s dominance prior to World War One. This works because every nation relies on dollars for international trade, a remnant of American dominance after World War Two. The final remnant of dollar-dominance harkens back to the final closing of the gold window in 1973. America had been willing to sell gold to multiple other nations at the then-current exchange rates with the dollar (“redeeming dollars” held by other nations), but we were running out of physical gold. Enter the “petro-dollar.”
The U. S. made a deal with the House of Saud that Saudi Arabia would sell oil contracts with other countries denominated in dollars. Other OPEC nations had to go along. Several ramifications manifested. One was/is that most nations needed to have dollars in order to buy oil, the most widely traded commodity. Because of a high trust level in the honesty of U. S. institutions – including banks, like the Federal Reserve – countries held dollars as part of their reserves. This “soaked up” a lot of dollars and helped/helps maintain the international value of the dollar.
The U. S., however, effectively flaunts the benefit of having other nations hold and trade in dollars, by creating debt for its own domestic purposes. This ramification exposes the fraudulent nature of American governance over the past 50 years or so, and now amounts to more than $30 TRILLION, with no end in sight. This one process threatens U. S. sovereignty and fiscal stability more than any other. Another ramification is the frenetic speculation in currency exchange rates. By trading in currency “futures,” countries “forced” to hold petro-dollars are able to hedge against dollar fluctuations, but the net effect is to weaken the dollar to keep commodity prices low (oil, natural gas, wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, pork, beef, steel, chicken, etc.). It also makes American manufactured products relatively expensive, helping to encourage manufacturers to off-shore production to lower-cost countries, hurting American labor and other economic segments, and driving up the need for Americans to buy products from overseas. So long as other nations need to have dollars to obtain energy and other commodities, they will accept dollars in payment for their manufactured goods. What if that stopped? Can you imagine astronomical price increases? Rates like 100% per year or more?
Life would change.
Financial gurus have been predicting an economic “reset” for years, and the unseating of the U. S. dollar is its basis. Yet, politically, we continue to borrow and spend as though the rest of the world will put up with American mendacity forever. What the Hell is a debt ceiling, anyway?
Very soon, Russia will complete its Ukraine travesty, simultaneously emasculating Europe and NATO, and China will then finalize its move on Taiwan. What “sanctions” do the Biden administration expect to use to counter that move? Whether sanctions or real military resistance, China always has the leverage over American debt, and will happily move to unseat the dollar, completing its own elevation to dominance in the world. At that point the U. S. will be unable to AFFORD to defend itself, an unforgivable circumstance. Would we turn over the keys to the country in a Rose Garden ceremony? Do you think we’d go nuclear? Do you think our progress on transgender equity in our military services enhances our deterrence?
Americans have elected, re-elected and re-elected, sometimes 15 times or more, the same scoundrels who have become wealthy in office while plunging the country into unheard-of debt. That debt is on us, everyone, not on those we’ve elected, because they have done that deed in our name. And we have rewarded them for it. Can we possibly turn our eyes away from the truth and expect life to go on with borrowed funds forever? Do we think it’s too complicated for us poor rubes to figure out? One day those debts (loans) will be “called” when that move can do the most damage to us. Of all the weaponry, research and advantage we have allowed our enemies to steal, the greatest threat is the one we created for ourselves, and that just to keep certain liars in power. Shame on us. Maybe this will abruptly change in 2022 when Republicans take over from the Democrats. If you have evidence of such being likely, please share it widely.
Amidst the wholesale weakening of the United States nation since Trump left office, we are suddenly facing the one alliance we have long hoped would never manifest: China and Russia, and in combination with China’s long-term economic attacks (including organized theft of technology and advanced research), now a combined, hot, military threat. Most Americans, automatically sympathetic towards the suffering Ukranians, are mostly blind toward the imminent threat of Chinese military action. This is upon us while the Biden administration has halted the momentum toward strengthening the U. S. military. God forbid that our country face its second existential threat while the fools in this administration are in charge. Our national independence and sovereignty could be lost in a week, if it comes to that.
Time may not be on our side. One cannot overview the world and our political circumstances… and the calendar, without realizing a little fear for where things might go from here. Where is that?
Let’s look at some of the pressures building up.
First, the political time-line. Mid-term elections are the historic relief valve for sometimes hasty or confused political decisions made during presidential elections two years earlier. There certainly were those in 2020. Because the national conscience is so, well… impacted by beliefs concerning the 2020 elections – stolen or not stolen – the release of tensions in the 2022 mid-terms is a little harder to predict than what a lot of pundits are trying to foresee. Most are making judgements on “normal” political considerations and it doesn’t seem Prudent to do so.
The weird eminence that most have already discounted, but who is the key to millions of voters’ decisions, is Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House. She has been a unique Speaker, at least. For decades she has appeared to be simply a fierce partisan and has been appreciated, if not revered, by partisan Democrats who were happy to be “winning” barely-understood battles through her slick machinations. By rights, she should be at the end of her career, and she probably is, but it’s a career that descended into a previously unrecognized socialism starting under Obama and deepening with hatred under Trump. In those 12 years, Democrats became uneasy. While enjoying victories Nancy engineered, no matter how messy, Dems also became concerned about the leftward lurch, yet had no other port in which to seek refuge. Over the Trump years, leftist hatred for “America First” left many Democrats adrift. What are they going to do in 2022?
If “centrist” or “American” Democrats abandon the Pelosi-led leftists (not that Pelosi was elected to lead the leftists: she has run, skipped twisted and kneeled as needed to stay ahead of them) will they suddenly vote Republican? That doesn’t seem Prudent. Will they fail to vote in standard numbers? That question forces Prudence to wonder about what “the Black vote” might do.
Blacks have slowly been drifting away from their Democrat plantation, with an interesting increase in that trend in 2020. Despite Covid, Blacks did well economically under Trump since 2017. Despite, also, a perpetual anti-Trump media blitz accusing Trump of racism, Blacks could see that his policies helped all races. Like all underdogs, Trump was seen somewhat sympathetically by Blacks who understood too well how prejudice hurts. Have Blacks been treated better by increasing leftism? Were they advanced by BLM-led riots and Antifa hatreds that damaged so many black businesses and jobs? Have they been helped by Democrats’ union-led resistance to school choice? Has weakening public safety served Black families or neighborhoods in any way? Are they particularly likely to “reward” Pelosi’s weird coalitions with more power, more votes? That doesn’t seem Prudent, either. But, will they vote for anyone else?
So, on the backdrop of multiple failures of the “Biden” administration and severe economic news, what will be the “shape” of the change in fortunes for our two parties? Over the next 11 months, how virulent will the Pelosi Left become? Clearly their anger has been kindled by the loss of legislative momentum thanks to West Virginia Senator, Joe Manchin and Arizona Senator, Kyrsten Sinema. Even 3 counties of Maryland would like to become part of West Virginia.
In 2020 we suffered through months of cultural destruction and destructive rioting and looting and economic despair in numerous cities. Many strange, leftist mayors and governors have been exposed as feckless, ignorant and ideologically foolish. Americans are practically fleeing their jurisdictions for states that seem to honor the Constitution more. Yet the Pelosi House insisted on passing the enormous, so-called “Build Back Better” bill that would have transformed fundamental freedoms and democratic-republic structures created by the Constitution. Against the backdrop of systemic failure at the southern border and the flood of illegals swept into the country by administration policies, the congress spent inordinate time on the “BBB” plan and the pointless “January 6th” commission. Not a word is spoken in congress about what Americans are truly upset about, not least of which is the southern border. With that legislation apparently doomed, what will the 117th Congress do to improve Democrats’ re-election chances in 2022? Most options are likely to do damage to the republic at least domestically.
_________
Internationally, the Biden bindlestiffs have made a mockery of leadership and of honesty. Without fundamental honesty, there are no diplomatic maneuvers that will work, almost regardless of what’s at stake. In matters of war and alliance, conditions, tensions, and opportunities for gross, deadly errors, can spiral out of control quite abruptly. Let’s look at the simplest area of tension: Iran.
The postulate is the following: Iran hates the United States as much or more than it hates Israel. Iran is a theocracy determined to correct spiritual wrongs to the point of suicide. To correct those wrongs, Iran will use nuclear weapons. The inherent danger is that first the Obama regime and now the Biden regime DON’T BELIEVE THESE THINGS. That is, they’d rather believe that Iran is as rational as other nations, desirous of better living standards for its people, better economic conditions internally, and willing to negotiate to achieve those ends. All this talk about “death to America” and wiping Israel off the map is just talk, just posturing. Because they don’t believe the United States can be guided by religious concepts of good and evil, neither can any other nation. The United States can show them how love is better than hate and kindness and generosity will prove that the U. S. can be a reliable partner in seeking a better life for Iranians.
As the imbecilic John F. Kerry, onetime Secretary of State once said: “Would that it were, would that it were.” For a man who has but the mildest relationship with truth, he places a lot of faith in the words of Iranian negotiators. He apparently believes that Iran is enrichening Uranium purely for domestic power production… to improve the standard of living for Iranians.
Trump, to his America-first credit, had a sense of when he was being lied-to, and that extended to Iran. He recognized that the “Iran Nuclear” agreement (never proposed as a nation-binding Treaty because it would never pass the Senate) was a pack of lies, which, naturally, Biden has been begging Iran to renew under his administration. Iran has refused, so far. With all the cash and lifting of sanctions that Obama and Biden have given them, the Iranians no longer need to negotiate further concessions under the agreement – they received what they needed for free. Now it is merely a matter of time before Iran starts issuing nuclear-backed threats toward Israel, which the Biden regime will perceive as opportunities to go “back to the negotiating table.” To their credit, Israel (and other nations in the Mideast) will take steps to prevent an Iranian strike. The U. S. won’t, failing to realize that Iran will likely strike both the Little Satan and the Big Satan simultaneously.
PRUDENT JUDGMENT: VERY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
The next simplest, as in somewhat more complicated, problem area is the Western Pacific, including both Taiwan and North Korea, but also India, unfortunately. Here is the postulate: China intends to take over Taiwan; China virtually controls what North Korea does at any point; China will not move against Taiwan if it believes the U. S. will fight for Taiwan’s independence; China is beginning to think that the U. S. will not make any serious moves to stop China (the Biden family’s compromised position vis a’ vis China is a factor, here); and, finally, North Korea will make some sort of military moves against South Korea at the same time, seriously complicating United States’ response to the Taiwan crisis. There has been shooting along the frontier of China and India within the past 18 months. It is not inconceivable that China would stir that pre-heated kettle at the same time or before, that it moves against Taiwan. This feint would likely involve Pakistan, as well, another nuclear power that hates India. Every nation in the arc from the Arabian Sea to Qinzhou will suddenly be seeking a side in the conflict. The failure of the U. S. to decisively defend its allies will transform the entire region and its oceans… and world trade.
PRUDENT JUDGMENT: EXTREMELY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
Finally, of the 3 hottest spots, Ukraine and Russia are preparing for some level of shooting. The U. S., thanks to Obama and Joe Biden’s family, has meddled in Ukraine for years. Ukraine is a big country that encompasses wide swaths of fertile land, great waterways, warm-water coastline on the Black Sea, huge coal deposits and iron ore, manganese ore, and other ores, which yield a large steel industry, heavy machinery manufacturing and, its greatest political weakness, a natural, relatively unimpeded pathway for oil and gas products to be transported to Western Europe. The same can transport armies, too.
For more than a thousand years the Russian people have had strong cultural and religious ties to Kyiv, now the capitol of Ukraine, and to Crimea, Odessa and Sevastopol. Strategically, the naval value of Crimea is perceived as so crucial to Russia, as with the USSR, that taking the Crimean peninsula “back” from a recently independent Ukraine was worth the international condemnation. It’s a done deal and will never be negotiable.
In addition, the industrial heartland of Ukraine in Donetsk, Kharkiv, Dnetpropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhya, covers much of eastern Ukraine from the Dneiper River to the Russian border. Russia depends on many of the manufacturers in the region for not just machinery, but military and aerospace equipment. Not having complete control of them is a sore spot. Further, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson districts have significant Russian populations and Russian-speaking populations, which has formed an excuse for Russian regulars posing as irregulars or subversives, to create an enclave of sorts with a militarized line facing Ukrainian army regulars.
Sensing weakness and indecision from the Biden administration, and determined to not have Ukraine join NATO, Putin and the Russian Federation is looking for the opportune time to, in effect, take control of eastern Ukraine, if not all of Ukraine, by military force or forced federation. When they move, what will Biden do? Both Democrats and some Republicans have made tough-sounding statements about standing firm with Ukraine as if the status of Ukraine were a vital national interest. Perhaps it is. But setting up a line of U. S. troops to deter Russia seems unduly provocative. If the situation were reversed and the Russians were placing troops to deter the U. S. from taking over cartel-dominated Mexico, let’s just say, we would certainly not find that a reason to stand down, would we?
What seems “small” to most Americans, in geopolitical terms, could place us in a hot confrontation with a huge nuclear power, 4,000 miles from our border, where both the land location and the naval one make us the underdog.
PRUDENT JUDGEMENT: VERY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, and more dangerous than it appears.
____________
The shift away from “America First” thanks to the 2020 “elections,” has caused friends and foes, alike, to re-evaluate their relationships with the U. S. The brutal withdrawal from Afghanistan, apparently executed by military idiots and a bumbling president, has changed strategic calculations by many nations. The English-speaking world no longer reveres the U. S. as the leader of their coalition, and certainly does not respect Biden as it did Trump. A strong, pro-national leader is not only respected, but understood by other nations, including adversaries. There is a profound logic to leadership that clearly is patriotic and who speaks clearly of his – or her – intentions. No nation likes surprises, internationally, nor confusing messages. Every leader can make clear judgments about clear leaders, even about those they view as opponents. This is not our current situation.
It has been said many times that the most dangerous circumstance is when other nations are unsure about what America will fight for; it is yet even more dangerous when America, itself, is unsure. God save us.
There are wars and rumors of war. How pleasant the last year of Ronald Reagan’s term appears, looking back. The Soviet Union was falling apart, the economy was in good shape, there was no ISIS, the Middle East was relatively calm, commodity markets were “under control,” so to speak, Syria, Libya, Venezuela and even the East Coast of Africa, Iraq and Iran were comparatively un-troublesome. Nicaragua was yanked back from Communism, Chile restored free elections, casting off Pinochet’s military police state (CIA -created), and American ships were still welcome in the Philippines. Thankfully, the senior George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis for president. Desert Storm and Bill and Hillary Clinton were yet to burden the polity.
Read the history of the ‘80s and things were anything but calm and peaceful. Nelson Mandela was still in jail, Robert Mugabe was firmly installed as “president” of Zimbabwe, and Hosni Mubarak was in his first decade of his never-untroubled leadership of Egypt and rough alliance with the U. S. Africa was in turmoil and many were starving, there, while tribal racism threatened millions. Argentina barely functioned with double digit inflation, yet decided to invade the “Falklands/Malvinas” to “reclaim” its sovereignty, based as much on proximity as on history. The U. K. decided under Thatcher, to re-take them. Ronald Reagan easily subverted the Monroe Doctrine to help his friend, Maggie, sink the General Belgrano.
Typically we try to believe that politics creates war and the conditions for war, but we can’t quite succeed at that. While war may be a political tool, it rarely rewards the party or leader in power in the intended way. On the other side of the mirror, however, it can be observed that war often creates politics – in fact, not just often, but generally – in that militarism is easily equated with patriotism and tends to divide the body politic along patriotic lines. One cannot hide from the truth that neither the body politic nor the nations at war are generally benefited. Individual politicians or their party… maybe.
Now, what? A supposedly “America first” presidential candidate (meaning to a degree: America only) has been turned in the span of 5 months to a president willing to view the world like a so-called “neo-Con.” Abruptly, acts of war – missiles into Syria, super-bomb into Afghanistan, threats of hot responses to North Korean “provocations” – are deemed useful internationally. Supposedly, this turn-about and its apparent unpredictability of the new president, will move China to change its policies toward North Korea; will cause Russia to pull back from its prior stance in Syria, and possibly in Ukraine and Georgia. Even Iran’s theocrats will quake at the threats of Donald Trump since we have been willing to take some actions against people or things that have almost no chance of retaliation.
Perhaps we should bomb Venezuela because the government there is starving its people and being mean.
Sudan and Zimbabwe are worth at least some cruise missiles, aren’t they? How demeaning it is to choose Syria… Syria! Sudan has at least as crappy a government as Syria! We live in a strange nation growing stranger.
Americans think, many of us, that the U. S. is pure and well-intentioned and very misunderstood by all the nations or groups that distrust us and wish to kill us. Our global deployment of military activities: 156 countries in a recent estimate, is for humanitarian aid and economic development. Well, that’s right – economic development of somebody.
Maybe it’s necessary. Multiple administrations have thought so. The “Truman Doctrine” of containing Communism has morphed into the unspoken – dare we say, secret – doctrine of containing everybody. The World’s policeman, indeed.
Well, say the thoughtful ones, if not us, then who? China? Russia? God forbid! Believe us, they thoughtfully pronounce, you don’t want to live in a world that’s not “led” by the United States. Perhaps not.
Money talks. Our beneficial “Petro-dollar” scheme buttressed by Saudi Arabia has permitted the U. S. to borrow and spend in astronomical quantities, to the degree that our worldwide military adventures have been “free,” sort-of. We have outspent our income – the largest income in the world to boot – for 50 years, by creating unlimited debt. Maybe it is completely fair that we “protect” the world with its own money. After all, it costs us only the interest – and a few thousand of our very best men and women. At least during this election cycle.
So, Mr. President, what are we going to stir up? It’s one thing to risk your own people, quite another to risk most of South Korea. Or Japan. Attacking the North Koreans can never be done with clear knowledge of all of their capabilities. What if they have pre-positioned a couple of nukes next to the DMZ? Or just offshore of South Korea? How many “South” Koreans are really “North” Koreans? Some, for sure.
And, then, there ARE the 30,000 or so Americans watching the DMZ from the South who are some sort of “trip wire” in the event North Korea starts an invasion. That must be a comfort. Most likely, if the North does decide to make a move, it won’t start at the DMZ, it will start well behind it, in Seoul. Then what shall the 30,000 do? Invade the North? That’s not a plan, either. The North has many, many more troops and artillery arrayed on their side.
If the North moves it will be all or nothing – do or die. They must know that Hell will shortly find them if they start anything. By the same token, if the U. S. starts something, the North must either fold its tent and retreat or, again, go all out with everything they have – they’ve sort-of talked themselves into it.
Oh, Mr. Trump, what are you going to do? You risk the South at the very least. Recent endeavors show that there are not enough bombs to deliver victory without protracted ground action. Do you really think China will allow the decimation of its handy cat’s paw? Or will Russia, for that matter? Who will overnight become whose friend if things “go hot?”
Finally, like abused children, North Koreans will not abandon their homeland or their dear leader. I think you have not contemplated the potential of a new Asian war long enough, Mr. T. You’ve not been in office long enough: and there can be only two terms.
Nearly every day there is some article or letter in the newspapers that decries the fact that the United States’ “defense” budget is larger than the next 7 nations’ defense budgets, combined. Moreover, that “bloated” defense budget could be reduced significantly so that the “savings” can be used to feed the hungry and house the homeless right here in our own country, for Heaven’s sake.
None of these heartfelt concerns is based on the right perspectives or even the right data. That’s the trouble with statistics.
For example, 65% of fiscal 2017’s Federal Budget is committed to entitlements, pensions, health-care and education. From a Constitutional standpoint, most of that 65% is not the business of the federal government, whereas defense, now 16% of the budget, categorically IS.
Years ago welfare was strictly local… and recipients were a little ashamed of having to ask for it. Many, your grandparents or great-grandparents, and many of your parents, would do the most menial jobs to AVOID being on welfare and to get “off” of it as quickly as possible. Children learned this reaction and revulsion. Welfare was a handout when you needed it, as temporarily as possible.
Soon after World War II, though, states took over welfare from cities and towns, mainly under pressure from cities, which were buckling under the northward migration of blacks from the deep south. Almost immediately, states began prevailing on Washington to take the burden off of their backs. After all, weren’t the new Northerners crossing state lines because of “national” conditions in the economy?
After 13 years of the “New Deal,” we could have seen where this was going. There were votes to be gained in the impassioned cries for better – federal – welfare: codified compassion.
Truman blazed integration trails, Eisenhower enforced anti-segregation in schools, Kennedy hemmed and hawed but crawled toward full integration and voting rights legislation, Johnson, riding a wave of sympathy for his murdered predecessor, got civil rights legislation done, and then carried on further to create some wildly expensive – reckless – new “rights”: federal, unaccountable, politically charged, easily defrauded, vote-attractive welfare.
Smartly, though, Johnson couched the new largesse to which people were now entitled – not ashamed-of, in wonderfully sympathetic terms and names. Names like: Aid for Dependent Children (AFDC), Women, Infants and Children (WIC), Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP, ie. Food Stamps), Pell Grants (free college), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Rental Voucher Program (Section 8), Federal National Mortgage Administration (“Fannie-Mae”), Child Nutrition (School lunch, breakfast, dinner!), Head Start (very, very expensive day-care), Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), and, the granddaddy of them all: MEDICAID.
Current spending on these and more than ONE HUNDRED other federal “anti-poverty” programs (who could be PRO-poverty?) is nearly 900 BILLION dollars. That means that our virtually bankrupt federal government is BORROWING money to provide welfare.
Well, say unionized federal social workers and sympathizers, our defense budget is larger than the next 7 nations’ combined, let’s cut that, first!
Except… it isn’t.
When China, for example, builds sand islands in the South China Sea, and puts military airstrips and naval “bases” on them, and claims 200-mile territorial waters around these extensions of “China,” it’s not a military expenditure, but something else. For example.
When Russia directs a manufacturer to produce engines for new IRBM’s and ICBM’s, they aren’t military expenditures – they’re developments in space exploration. All peaceful. And subterranean military bunkers for both armament manufacture and survival are certainly construction projects… and expensive, but military? Not so you’d know.
And no other country carries the degree of personnel costs and benefits that are packed into the “Defense” budget of the United States. Simple ledger numbers are not comparable with other nations’ budgets.
Actually, under the Obama administration, defense has been cut a few times. One of his first steps was to fold tens of billions of retirement costs into the Defense Department budget. Logically, the cost of military retirements should not be measured as part of the Pentagon’s war-fighting / force-projection budget, should they? They certainly don’t threaten anyone but us.
Next, Obama forced the Congress into the “sequester” process, of which a large fraction of restrictions were imposed on defense – to be “fair.” Big cuts.
Finally, he walked out of Iraq, abandoning the very bloody, very costly gains we had made there. We are now paying to regain what had been won. His frothy, fraudulent Iran anti-nuclear “agreement” (cunningly not a treaty), will cost us many billions going forward – billions that need not have been spent had there been a different foreign policy.
The new president sees significant weakness that exists now or very shortly will, as normal refitting and reconditioning of hardware takes larger and larger fractions of critical military systems out of service. Warplanes are becoming antiques as our most experienced pilots are retiring; it is our phenomenal pilots who keep last-generation fighters useful in their 30th year of service. Now our latest fighter platform is too expensive to buy enough of!
If anyone thinks that McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried chicken are going to convince our potential enemies to not work – and fight – to destroy us, it is time for him or her to wake up. Maybe unrestricted immigration will make everybody love one another, but so far it is weakening the “West” and confusing our Constitutional rights with national suicide.
