Tag Archives: Putin

March Madness

Another good one from my friend and brother Marine, Greg. Thank you Greg. Yes March Madness is upon us in more ways than one. BTW, the Lady Vols won there first round. LOL. Yeah I know, my bride and I watch Women’s College Basketball. I get ribbed about that a lot, especially from the book’s editor, my best Marine friend, Dennis. He simply cannot understand why I watch the women play but not the men. Because watching 7′ giants beat each other up, while I can watch what basketball used to be many tears ago i.e., the Bulls in their heyday!

A March to Madness

By: G. Maresca

Not too long ago, March madness meant college basketball rather than nuclear brinkmanship.

By not winning quickly and outright in Ukraine, former Russian president, and prime minister Dmitri Medvedev, a Putin hand puppet, wasted no time threatening the West saying Russia could rip up its nuclear agreements. Putin endorsed such malfeasance by placing his nuclear forces on heightened alert saying we may face “consequences you have never seen.”

In doing so, Russia placed the once remote possibility that tactical nuclear weapons could be exploited on the battlefield making what was once inconceivable, anything but. Moreover, BCA Research set the odds of a “civilization-ending global nuclear war” over the next year at an “uncomfortably high 10%.”

Russia telegraphed their intentions when troops seized the decommissioned Chernobyl nuclear plant that in 1986 produced the planet’s worst nuclear accident.

Russia is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency where an attack against any nuclear facility committed to civilian power production is a violation of governance. This breach is also included in the United Nations Charter, and the Geneva Conventions.

Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear facility, Europe’s biggest, triggered a fire in the plant’s administrative building that fortunately did not affect the facility’s six nuclear reactors or produce a radiation leak. This flagrant assault was nothing short of a war crime proving that conventional weapons are far from the only option available in the Russian arsenal.

Putin made it clear for years what he intended to do given his invasion of Georgia and the Crimea proving he has no intention of stopping until his objectives are met. Having NATO intervene to defuse a nuclear disaster risks further escalation but at some point, may be necessary.

Provided Russia captures all of Ukraine’s nuclear reactors it would hold Ukrainians hostage by manipulating the energy supply where small armed detachments would protect the reactors is certainly strategically feasible.

No nation is sovereign without energy independence of which nuclear plays a major role.  President Biden voluntarily surrendered ours in exchange for Russian and Middle Eastern oil. American environmentalists approve of fossil fuels provided they come from such perilous places where tyrants like Putin are able to finance their evil.

Provided Ukraine’s nuclear facilities are unsecure, its spent radioactive matter will risk a nuclear catastrophe far beyond Ukraine’s borders. Ukrainians are diligently laboring in the middle of a war to keep the reactors safely operating – unsung heroes in a crusade teeming with them.  Ukrainians need an abundance of aid on many levels most especially securing their nuclear power plants and the radioactive material they produce.

Putin’s invasion is not just about returning Ukraine to the Russian fold, but a siege on the international order that for decades has worked to safeguard the peaceful use of nuclear power.

By closing in on Ukraine’s nuclear power plants that total 15 reactors at four sites, Russia rather than the contracted Westinghouse Electric, will profit from Ukrainian nuclear fuel that they had been supplying. What garnered little media attention is the fact that Westinghouse was in the planning stages to build at least five nuclear reactors in Ukraine over the next two decades. According to the World Nuclear Association, that enterprise is worth more than $30 billion for Westinghouse, an American company.

What kept nuclear war at bay during the longstanding Cold War era was M.A.D. — Mutually Assured Destruction. Both the U.S. and Soviet Union knew that any nuclear launch would be returned and annihilate both countries. However, it is another thing entirely to confront a potential nuclear conflict when one side believes it can win.

Russia is not the only American adversary that could employ its nuclear arsenal as a buffer for a conventional invasion. China is modernizing and multiplying its nuclear forces and covets Taiwan the way the Russians do Ukraine. Regarding Ukraine, the Chinese are trying to appear neutral, but in actuality are Russia’s co-conspirator.

The war raging throughout Ukraine should alarm the international community to reassess suppressing nuclear weapons. Failing to take heed to such a benevolent cause will lead to another and unnecessary nuclear arms race.

Add to this toxic mix, the nuclear starved Iranian mullahs – religious zealots possessed with an Islamic apocalyptic mentality – where “mutually assured destruction” is not a deterrent, but an incentive.

 

Finally!

FINALLY!  Generals from all services are beginning to speak out against what CMC is doing to the Marine Corps. Many have met with him, but state, he took notes, asked no questions, and changed nothing. This first article is from a Marine I know very well. I was his Company GySgt for a short while, until I was commissioned and  stayed in the same company; he was a Capt at the time. I served with him again when he was a Colonel and  G-1 of the 2d Marine Division. Then again when I had 2/6 and was going to become 2/8, he was my regimental CO. Then yet again when he was a fresh caught  BG at LFTCLant. So, I know him fairly well.

I and several others pegged him as a future general when he was nothing but a captain at 8th & I. The smartest, most capable Marine officer I ever met throughout my career. When he made four star he was assigned as  Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic and Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Command. Consider the significance of that assignment. The first time ever that a non-naval officer was assigned to that billet. He controlled all the  forces, including the navy ships throughout the Atlantic!

General Jack knows his stuff, so I am heartened by the fact he has finally come to life. Someone had  best listen to him, specifically another four star named Berger!

Wasteful Spending, a Shrinking Force and the Marine Corps’s Big Bet

The Marines may be “the only branch adapting fast for the future” (“U.S. Defense After Ukraine,” Review & Outlook, March 8), but what future and how wisely? The military’s poor record of predicting the next war urges maintaining flexibility. This has long been a strength of the Marine Corps, which maintained itself for decades as a combined-arms force in readiness, rapidly deployable, balanced and able to organize for any mission. This has proved its worth to the nation at all levels of crisis and conflict.

Yet today the Marine Corps is betting all on a conflict with China in the Western Pacific, to the neglect of other contingencies, creating littoral regiments to be scattered in small units across island chains to engage Chinese ships with missiles as part of a campaign for sea control. To pay the bill for this new vision of war, the Marine Corps has already got rid of all its tanks. It is reducing cannon artillery from 21 to five active batteries, eliminating three infantry battalions and reducing those remaining by a third in manpower, and reducing air power and other combat support commensurately. The war in Ukraine shows the folly of this. Or should someone tell the Russians and Ukrainians these systems are all obsolete?

These initiatives risk turning the Marine Corps into a niche force optimized for one conflict that is unlikely to occur, while hobbling its ability to meet security challenges that are certain. This is not what the nation needs or expects from its Marine Corps.

Gen. J.J. (Jack) Sheehan, USMC (Ret.)

Alexandria, Va.

Mr. Sheehan was NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (1994-97). How dare the WSJ refer to this Marine as “Mr.”

Another general speaks out in the same WSJ article.

The editorial board has been right on its defense analysis for months. Now it is correct about our defense-budget outlook, especially the relationship between the creeping inefficiencies that have plagued the Pentagon and our need to modernize.

If Vladimir Putin is successful, he will not stop at Ukraine. Nor will Xi Jinping stop at Taiwan. America must be ready to combat these threats and adjust to the end of the post-Cold War order. That will require more defense spending—a reality that our NATO allies are coming to grasp as well. But if we don’t get more bang for the buck, these spending increases won’t yield the capabilities we need to defend our freedoms, which are at risk.

Though we spend more today in constant dollars than we did at the peak of the Reagan buildup, we have a smaller force by all measures. The largest drivers of this ever-shrinking fighting force are a broken acquisition system that costs more, takes longer and produces less; the excessive amount of money tied up in the Pentagon’s massive, layered overhead and support functions; and the fully burdened and life-cycle costs of the all-volunteer force, with its outdated personnel management, compensation and retirement programs.

Without reforms, we will not improve our capabilities in either the quality or quantity necessary. The Pentagon and Congress need to establish performance goals that ensure we are better, faster and cheaper than our adversaries. The focus needs to be on outputs, not only inputs.

Congress should also fund the government through a regular process instead of the insanity of never-ending continuing resolutions, which already cost the Defense Department close to $40 billion in purchasing power in this fiscal year. The Pentagon and defense-industrial base need steady, predictable funding. Budget chaos is no way to deter our adversaries.

Maj. Gen. Arnold Punaro, USMC (Ret.)

McLean, Va.

Mr. Punaro is author of “The Ever-Shrinking Fighting Force.”

Your editorial observes that President Jimmy Carter “did a 180-degree turn . . . and began a defense buildup.” This is a bit generous. Alarmed by the enormous Soviet military program and the overthrow of the shah, NATO countries agreed to each undertake a 3% increase in real defense spending. Yet when Mr. Carter offered his budget for fiscal year 1980, his defense numbers were closer to half that, which his spokesmen rationalized with the fatuous claim that the part relevant to NATO had met the target.

In the face of this foot-dragging, two “defense Democrats,” Sens. Ernest Hollings and Sam Nunn, took matters into their own hands, introducing an amendment to raise the overall number by 3%, as pledged, and by 5% the next year. The Carter administration lobbied strenuously against this, yet it passed 55-42. This began the buildup that was carried much further by the Reagan administration, contributing to victory in the Cold War.

Joshua Muravchik

Wheaton, Md.

Mr. Muravchik was executive director of the Coalition for a Democratic Majority (1977-79).

STRENGTH    RESPECTS    STRENGTH. Always has, always will, Amen

Strength Respects Strength

And as Greg points out, power has always respected power. Its been that way since Adam and Eve. Putin is no different than anyone who has a left and right brain that are somehow connected, which rules out Biden and his gang of idiots.

 

A Putinized disaster

By: G. Maresca

 

Vladimir Putin never accepted defeat in the Cold War. The former KGB agent stated how the dissolution of the Soviet Union was one of the greatest tragedies in world history.

Given their strategic location, rich natural resources and fertile farmland, an old Russian proverb says there is no Russian Empire without Ukraine. Since the 1772 Partitions of Poland Agreement, Ukraine had been part of Russia until 1991.

For over 30-years, Ukrainians have realized greater economic freedom and opportunities that they never experienced as a satellite of the former Soviet Union. Such successes intimidate Putin. Economically, Russia has been stagnant fueled by a declining population. To offset any further demographic and economic slide, Putin hopes to return those old Soviet republics to the Russian fold.

Ironic how Russia did not invade Ukraine when they had a “Russian asset” in the White House. According to Biden, the borders of Ukraine are sacrosanct and must be protected. The American border not so much.

Rewind to 2014, when Ukraine lost the Crimean Peninsula after President Obama’s chemical weapons “red line” in Syria disappeared and Hillary Clinton’s “re-set” was outright dismissed prompting Putin to make his move. Fast forward eight years, and Obama’s vice president has the top job and tells Putin at their initial meeting that “the adults are back in charge.”

Those adults alongside Biden are Harris, Pelosi, Kerry, Trudeau, and Macron. Kerry’s response to Putin’s invasion would be comical if it wasn’t so pathetic: “I hope President Putin will help us to stay on track with respect to what we need to do for the climate.” Watching our Woke powder puff team of generals grossly mismanage our withdrawal from Afghanistan was no help.

The West’s superlative six are nothing but appeasement, global elitists more concerned about wokeness, gender pronouns, defunding the police, open borders, and handcuffing America’s gas and oil resources.

Since assuming office, Biden went to war with American energy production by canceling the Keystone Pipeline that would have prolonged our energy independence. It would have kept world oil and gas prices in check and limit a major source of Russian revenue, while easing American inflation. Moreover, sustaining sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline under the Baltic Sea would have denied Putin additional income and political leverage.

Barring new Alaskan production and exploration in the lower 48 states only handcuffs American energy independence and potential. This not only hurts Americans at the pump, but our allies, too, while the high price of oil pays for Russia’s invasion.

Biden’s irrational energy policy underscores another Vlad, this one named Lenin and his infamous wisecrack about how the “capitalists will sell us the rope by which we hang them.”

How pathetic is it when a Canadian waitress who donated $50 to the freedom truckers suffered more financially than Putin when Trudeau locked down her bank account?

The Russian invasion of Ukraine highlights just how fundamentally inept the UN is.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney was spot-on saying how Russia was foe number one but was mocked by Obama and Biden who believed Putin to be an equitable geopolitical partner.

Like all despots, Putin understands, and values strength and he certainly empathizes with the legacy of the Romanov Tsars and their successors in the Kremlin. Negotiating with Putin, China, and the ayatollahs of Iran only comprehends dynamism, defiance, and dominion. The results are playing out in real time in Ukraine with the Baltic states lying in the balance.

Don’t dismiss the Chinese desire to reunify Taiwan with the mainland, and who could forget our favorite ayatollahs in Tehran finally obtaining their nuclear warhead and those North Koreans forever aiming south. Power only respects power. It has been that way since the dawn of civilization, yet the West fails to comprehend its lesson.

Civilians throughout Ukraine are battling back in what the New York Times calls, “a massive grass-roots movement” that must be giving Democrats heartburn. The next time you hear leftists threatening to take away your guns and ammo think about our friends in Ukraine fighting to keep their freedom.

May God bless, guide and protect the Ukrainian people whose courageous resolve reminds us how precious freedom is that many take for granted.

So where does the U.S. fall in this power and strength struggle for respect? Well, let’s look at the current status of the foundation of  our power and strength – the military establishment.

From the Free Beacon

 • March 1, 2022 5:00 am

As Russia Wages War, US Army Trains Officers on Gender Identity. Mandatory military training program pushes soldiers to undergo gender reassignment surgery

While Russia wages a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. Army is putting its soldiers through training on gender pronouns and coaching officers on when to offer soldiers gender transition surgery, according to an official military presentation on the subject obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The mandatory presentation, “Policy on the Military Service of Transgender Persons and Persons with Gender Dysphoria,” was given to officers earlier this month along with instructions for them to train their subordinates on the material. Portions of the presentation were provided to the Free Beacon by a whistleblower who was ordered to undergo the training as a high-ranking officer in the Army Special Forces.

An Army spokesman confirmed to the Free Beacon that the slides in question are part of “mandatory training” and come from an official program “used to train Army personnel on the recent changes to the DoD and Army transgender service policy.” All Army personnel, from soldiers to commanders and supervisors, are required to participate in the training by Sept. 30, 2022, according to the spokesman.

The transgender presentation follows on a June 2021 announcement by the Army altering its policies so that transgender soldiers can openly serve. The shift in policy is part of a larger push by the Biden administration to make the military more welcoming to transgender people. These efforts have prompted pushback from Republicans in Congress and some within the military who view the policy changes as an effort to promote “woke” propaganda within the service. As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens to spark a larger conflict, military experts and insiders say they are concerned America’s fighting force is prioritizing woke culture over protecting the American people.

“The Army allows transgender soldiers to serve openly,” states the presentation, which is tailored for Army commanders and leaders. “An otherwise qualified soldier shall not be involuntarily separated, discharged, or denied reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity.”

The presentation offers several hypothetical scenarios for how soldiers should be treated if they are transgender or in some stage of transitioning to another gender.

In one situation, a “soldier who was assigned male at birth says he identifies as a female,” “lives as a female in his off-duty hours,” and “is not requesting to be treated as a female while on duty.” In that case, the soldier should be treated with dignity and respect and no further action is required.

If the transgender soldier, however, “later requests to be identified as a female during duty hours and/or experiences increased distress relating to his gender identity,” the officer in charge must “inform [the] soldier of the Army’s transgender policy and recommend that he sees a military medical provider.”

“Gender transition in the Army,” the presentation states, “begins when a soldier receives a diagnosis from a military medical provider indicating that gender transition is medically necessary.”

In another scenario included in the presentation, a “soldier is assigned female at birth. She tells her first sergeant that she identifies as male and would like to be treated as a male. She has not yet seen a military medical provider.”

In this situation, Army leaders are ordered to “inform [the] soldier that the Army recognizes a soldier’s gender by the soldier’s gender marking in DEERs,” or the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System, a massive database that tracks military members. The soldier, according to the presentation, will be expected to meet the uniform, grooming, and physical readiness standards associated with their recognized gender.

The soldier will then be sent to a military medical provider who can determine whether “gender transition is medically necessary.”

Damn, don’t those kind of reports make you feel warm and fuzzy? I suspect reports like this  has Putin shaking in his KGB boots, ya think? I’ve made no secret on here that I am somewhat of a Putin fan. I shall pray for the people of Ukraine, but that’s as far as I will go. I have tired of us being the caretaker of the world only to lose men and women to useless political wars where we have no interests whatsoever. How dare we lose one American soldier, Marine, sailor, or airman fighting in Ukraine while our own country is going to the dogs and fast becoming a Third World Shithole. I’ve discussed Putin with some of my peers about how bad Putin is and what he’s doing. I make no apologies, while I may not agree with what he is doing, I do respect the man’s fortitude and determination to do what he considers necessary for the good of his country.  That’s a lot more than I can say about our nation’s leader.

Meanwhile, thanks to that person in our oval office, WTI crude opened this a.m. at $111.37/bbl and Brent crude opened at $114.43/bbl. And to think that on Trump’s last day in office WTI was $52.87/bbl, and before COVID hit Trump had it down to $3.32/bbl, and we were paying less for gas than we had paid in 30 years. Two years ago we were an oil exporter and  energy independent. Putin’s getting rich; we are paying for his actions in Ukraine at the gas pump.

Guys, we have major problems right here within our own borders e.g., CPI at 7.1% in January, literally 1,000s storming our borders every month, spending out of control, rising prices for everything especially the necessities for life, a military training to become warm and fuzzy powder puffs, Marines changing their entire force structure, and the list goes on. We are no longer the powerful nation to be respected like we were two years ago. We need to stay out of Ukraine , and let Europe stand on their own two feet for a change.