Porcupines are Dead Meat For a Hungry Bear

Ukraine should focus on being a army-centric combined arms (across all domains) military rather than seeking a "porcupine" defense. 

Now it is Ukraine's turn to get quills? 

By "going porcupine," Ukraine can make it clear to Russia that invasion will be costly and unsuccessful. But Kiev needs help.

To be fair, some of what the authors advocate are simply increasing Ukrainian military capabilities. That's fine. So I'm not saying the suggestions are necessarily bad. Some are great.

But using the "porcupine" label might confuse the situation and lead Ukraine down a bad path.

This strategy is modeled on Hezbollah strategy in its conflict with Israel. Hezbollah relies on dragging on a war while it kills Israeli soldiers and civilians behind human shields. The strategy relies on having an enemy like Israel that is sensitive to its own losses and sensitive to world opinion, and so wary of killing too many of their enemy.

Sometimes it seems like "porcupine" strategies are sold on the false notion that there is a cheap way to guarantee an enemy won't strike. It is the new and improved "asymmetric" or "Hezbollah" strategy that have long been raised.

A major flaw is that Ukraine isn't going to focus on a strategy of killing Russian civilians. And if Ukraine tries to focus on killing Russian soldiers without stopping them, the flaw is that if the enemy decides it is willing to accept the casualties it will invade and win. How sure are we that we can calibrate the acceptable losses? How do we know when the potential invader's calculations change? 

Mind you, I've long been in favor of  Ukraine having long-range fires to strike Sevastopol bases and having naval mines to put Russian warships at risk. But I wouldn't rely only on inflicting pain on the Russian fleet to deter Russia any more than I'd rely on only killing soldiers or killing civilians, period.

Why are so many analysts enamored with "porcupine" strategies that don't try to defeat invaders but increase the cost to invaders of winning?  This isn't sports betting where you "win" even if you lose by beating the spread. 

Defeating enemies is the best way to increase their cost.

And if you aren't advocating a "porcupine" strategy but simply want to increase combined arms or multi-domain integrated military capabilities, say that. Don't use the trendy terminology. It just confuses the issue. Which can lead to defeat as you forget the real reason for having a military.

Inflict an All-Domain Pacific Ulcer

Can the Navy and Marine Corps plague the Chinese sufficiently by focusing on the anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) weapons and tactics in the sea domain alone?

The Marines want to insert small contingents across the western Pacific to inflict A2/AD capabilities on the Chinese navy if it surges out to sea to defeat America and our naval allies:

David Berger wants to give Xi Jinping an ulcer. Early this month the U.S. Marine Corps commandant signed out the “Concept for Stand-in Forces,” a strategic directive that outlines how small marine units will operate along Asia’s first island chain in concert with the U.S. Navy fleet to make things tough on China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy) during a conflict in the East China Sea, Taiwan Strait, or South China Sea. 

The Navy will do the same thing with dispersed but linked forces that mass effects:

The navy wants swarms of light combatant ships able to fight in a “distributed” fashion, dispersing in space to evade the brunt of access denial. A smaller percentage of the fleet’s combat power would reside in each hull, and thus the fleet could afford to take losses in action yet retain enough combat power to fight on to victory.

The "ulcer" recalls the British campaign on the Iberian Peninsula that bled Napoleon's forces at its periphery:

The approach owes homage to the British Army and Royal Navy during the Napoleonic Wars. In 1807 Sir Arthur Wellesley, later Lord Wellington, led a modest-sized army ashore in Portugal. In the ensuing seven years Wellington’s army, supported from the sea, fought alongside Portuguese and Spanish partisans.  

It wasn't just partisans. The Portuguese supplied regular infantry to the British, too, I believe.

But I digress.

The 19th century French ulcer was an army ulcer enabled by British naval power. A British and allied army threatened the French on land in a peripheral area bordering France. The French had more important land problems but could not afford to lose Spain and bring a ground threat to France's border while France had those other more important land problems.

I have no problem with this approach to the Chinese in the 21st century. But I would like to see the Army have a role around China's periphery in support of allies, small theaters, or in direct raids. Indeed, I recalled the campaign of Wellington and called for inflicting that ulcer with the United States Army carrying out its core capability of large-scale ground combat. See my article in Military Review for that proposal.

A Navy-Marine ulcer can certainly inflict damaging and disproportionate casualties on the Chinese navy if the PLAN pushes out to the first island chain. But it won't prove to be deadly if China can pull back in the face of America's kill web, and still hold off direct attacks on China. 

Ultimately, it is not enough even to be able to sail at will close to China. The Navy and Marine effort must ultimately enable a major ground campaign around China's periphery. Just as 19th century British naval supremacy enabled Wellington's "ulcer" campaign ashore.

Posing a threat to China itself on the ground in cooperation with China's ground enemies is the way to make the ulcer debilitating and pressure China to end their war.

UPDATE: Is it too late to rename INDOPACOM as PAINCOM?

Defending Taiwan When the Chips are Down?

To deter or defeat China, Taiwan may have created the best defense pact ever with America and Japan without signing a defense pact.

 

Taiwan will build a semiconductor plant in Japan:

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd has received approval to set up a chip plant in Japan, Taiwan's investment commission of the ministry of economic affairs, which approved the investment, said in a statement on Monday.

This follows a Taiwanese decision to build such a plant in America:

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd (2330.TW) (TSMC) has started construction at a site in Arizona where it plans to spend $12 billion to build a computer chip factory, its chief executive said on Tuesday.

Taiwan is a leader in semiconductor design and manufacturing. Given their importance to economic and military uses, did Taiwan extract pledges from America and Japan to defend Taiwan in exchange for getting these plants safely away from China? 

That's what I wondered when I read the Japan story. And then four days later I read this: 

The U.S. and Japanese militaries have made a draft plan for a joint operation should an emergency with Taiwan arise, Japan's Kyodo news agency reported Thursday.

Under the draft plan,  the U.S. Marine Corps would deploy troops to and set up temporary bases on the Nansei island chain, an archipelago of Japan that stretches toward Taiwan, at the first sign of a Taiwan emergency, Kyodo said.

Japanese armed forces, meanwhile, would provide logistical support with ammunition and fuel supplies.

Although strictly speaking the joint operation just speaks of deploying troops--not using them against China.

The Marines would no doubt have anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons. Which would protect the northern flank of Taiwan and potentially secure lines of supply from Japan to Taiwan. 

And if China attacks the Japanese logistics ships, Japan will have a reason to invoke its defense pact with America and send in their combat self defense forces. 

Recall that earlier this month China was notified that it should have no doubt that Taiwan is inside our defense perimeter: 

Japan and the United States could not stand by if China attacked Taiwan, and Beijing needs to understand this, former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said on Wednesday.

Practically, deployment must occur before use. And use is envisioned. China might still delude themselves that America and Japan won't intervene. And worse, regardless of the true military balance, China could persuade themselves that they are stronger than they really are.

With Taiwanese chip plants in Japan and America, at least their military production wouldn't falter if China shuts down the plants by attacking, blockading, or invading.

But the Taiwanese control the plants.

Which means America and Japan would be more likely to intervene to defend or restore Taiwanese autonomy by ejecting the Chinese from Taiwan.

And China now knows that invading Taiwan to capture those advanced factories won't defang America and Japan.

I'm curious about who proposed this apparent deal.

UPDATE: After I wrote this post on Taiwan's chip leverage, I found this fascinating article: 

On the front line of the superpower struggle between the United States and China, Taiwan has fashioned a defensive masterstroke. It has become indispensable to both sides.

The key from America's point of view is that China can't cut off America and Japan if China captures Taiwan. And I imagine that if Taiwan doesn't sabotage the plants thoroughly that America would bomb the plants on Taiwan to deny China the chips. 

And this from the Taiwan government is kind of funny: 

"Rather than saying that the chip industry is Taiwan’s 'Silicon Shield,' the statement said, "it is more appropriate to say that Taiwan has an important position in the global supply chain."

Very tactful. But as I said, I think this is about making sure America and Japan fight for Taiwan. It won't deter China from invading.

Wondering What Our Syria Policy Is

Congress has decided the autopilot war in Syria has to have a point.

The Syria multi-war has been complicated and confusing. And it lingers on. It it would nice to know what our part of it is. President Biden had promised to "solve" that multi-war, but hasn't hinted at what that might be:

During his presidential campaign, Joe Biden promised to reassert American leadership to solve the crisis in Syria. Now, a year after his inauguration, his administration’s Syria policy is managing to be at once incoherent and contradictory. 

A bill passed by the Senate and House asserts Congressional authority to figure that out, 

including one demanding stricter oversight of Washington’s policies towards the conflict in Syria.

The 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requires the administration to report to lawmakers on its vision for an endgame for the conflict, as well as on diplomatic means to achieve those objectives in talks with major players like Russia and Turkey.

Lawmakers are demanding to see a timeline for weaning local Syrian fighters off US military support, as well as a plan for convincing foreign governments to repatriate their citizens detained in prison camps housing Islamic State members in Syria.

It's about time Syria got on America's radar screen, as I wrote almost four ago:

The Obama administration ignored the logical consequences of saying Assad had to step down by waging a parallel war as a de facto ally of Assad against the common enemy of ISIL that put off enforcing that declaration. The defeat of the ISIL caliphate has exposed the wide gap between the stated preference for Assad to leave and the focus of military action on ISIL only. So what do we do now?

America did not decide to push for the defeat of Assad. Trump made moves to pull out, which led to some silly panic, but did not. Yet remaining in eastern Syria without a mission worried me:

I was uncomfortable because we could face an attack that leads to a large loss of American lives that prompts a rapid retreat and defeat that encourages enemies. See the Marines Beirut Barracks bombing and the Battle of Mogadishu for examples of that worry. 

There are reasons for American troops to remain in eastern Syria. These include bolstering the Syrian Kurds. Weakening Assad. Fighting ISIL. Screening Iraq from infiltration from Syria. And fighting Iranian influence there. Are we doing any of those things? And are we willing to die for those things?

What would such a defeat do to our already shaken credibility following the Afghanistan skedaddle debacle?

So at some point the Biden administration should figure out if we have a policy or inertia in Syria. I congratulate Congress for raising this long-neglected subject. Don't hold having a policy for what we want to achieve hostage to a grand plan to "solve" Syria.

Nor should the Democrats' strange love of Iran be allowed to spoil a policy direction.

And do it before we have a Beirut Barracks or Mogadishu moment that prompts a sudden retreat when our dead troops expose that we have not decided what we are willing to fight for in Syria.

Why Russia Can't Have Nice Things--Yet?

Putin and his Russia-as-victim shtick is getting tiresome. Could it actually destroy Putin before it destroys Russia?

Are Russia's demands "outlandish" and pointless? 

Moscow asked Nato to cease all military activity in Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia. Russia also demanded guarantees that no former Soviet republics be permitted to join the alliance.

Or is this an ultimatum designed to fail and justify some sort of Russian attack?

What is exactly is Putin's objective for threatening a war against Ukraine that he'd lose one way or another if it doesn't go according to his plan?

Sometimes I think Putin fears Russia being ignored more than anything:

I swear, Russia really just doesn't like to be ignored after being the "big bad" during the Cold War:

The Russians and their Soviet predecessors acted on the theory it is better to be feared than liked. Russia is finding that without conventional military power, the fear option is not readily available.

And the charm and grace of Putin isn't enough to make up for that lost power.

But Russia can still threaten nuclear annihilation. Will Putin just stop this nonsense? 

After the Kremlin’s ultimatums to NATO appeared to fall flat earlier this week, Moscow ratcheted up the crazy on Tuesday with new claims of U.S. mercenaries supposedly preparing a 'chemical weapons' attack and a threat of unspecified "military-technical" [retaliatory] action.

Sounds like a nuclear threat. 

Does Putin really think the Russian people are eager to risk nuclear war? FFS.

 

And the hits keep coming.

Despite Putin's propaganda, more Russians have a positive view of America than a negative view. 

Yet don't think the threats have no effect on us. This article is part of a ridiculous "blame the victim" Russian apologist line of argument to "understand" and excuse Russian aggression. No Ukrainian problems or mistakes justify Russia invading and dismembering Ukraine, and insisting that Russia has the right to control Ukraine and deny it the freedom to choose its own destiny.

Remember it costs Russia money to keep an army poised to invade, the Russian people don't seem eager for war, and Putin would like the West to offer concessions before they notice Russia is weak. But Westerners willing to blame Ukraine for the crime of being invaded and not liking it might save Putin.

Putin says he doesn't want war over Ukraine and wants a quick response from the West to his demands. This is aimed at the people who "understand" Russian "fears." But on the other hand, Putin says legal guarantees from America can't be trusted. Project much?

And if Putin wants guarantees but can't trust guarantees, just what is he up to? Maybe he will invade and counts on rolling the dice and getting good rolls about a dozen times in a row.

I mean, it sure looks like Putin is figuratively burning his bridges behind him to show resolve:

"What the U.S. is doing in Ukraine is at our doorstep... And they should understand that we have nowhere further to retreat to. Do they think we’ll just watch idly?" Putin said.

But it could be a bluff. Although if Putin starts something don't doubt Russia will show "proof" of American mercenaries in Ukraine. Russia has the physical "evidence" already.

Or maybe he aims for smaller military objectives in more of a punitive mission. Just bomb the Ukrainians a bit and declare that "Russia taught them a lesson."

Or maybe Putin doesn't want to risk any military action out of fear that things will go horribly wrong. Maybe Putin is massing troops on Ukraine's border to shield a cyber-attack on Ukraine: 

Now the United States and Britain have quietly dispatched cyberwarfare experts to Ukraine in hopes of better preparing the country to confront what they think may be the next move by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia as he again menaces the former Soviet republic[.]

One thing I hadn't considered as a reason for Russia's preparations to invade Ukraine is that it has nothing to do with attacking Ukraine (I think I read this somewhere but can't remember where). Could this drama be for shielding the annexation of the Ukrainian Donbas territory that Russia's proxies hold? And while he's at it, would Putin annex Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which Russia pried away from Georgia?

Wouldn't  the West breathe a sigh of relief that Putin "only" wants to secure past conquests rather than make new conquests?

Putin's scary talk seems unhinged when you consider he blames NATO for a crisis he started. While this may scare the West, Putin might find he scares enough powerful Russians who don't want to go on his Viking funeral ride for the sake of scraps of Ukrainian territory. This isn't Soviet days. Everyone sees what Putin says to the West.

Who knew? 

Invading other countries is a historically proven way to make lasting enemies.

And threatening to invade is a proven way to scare the Hell out of his own people:

One big difference between Putin's Russia and the Soviet Union no matter how tragic Putin believes the demise of the USSR was is that the Russian people are no longer up to suffering 30 million casualties to win a war.

I'm not panicked. Nor do I think we need to offer much more than cosmetic concessions: 

Without firing a shot, Putin has managed to send the West into a collective panic -- or at least into a position where they feel the need to appease the aging autocrat.

Get a room.

Honestly, this level of crisis that Putin is stoking might just provoke enough powerful and ordinary Russians to wonder if Putin himself is the foreign plot to destroy Russia. Could Putin end up hanging from a lamp post by his heels before this is over?

Putin has cranked the threats up to 11. Which makes me think he is desperate to hide Russian weakness. So fingers crossed that Putin actually understands this: 

An invasion of Ukraine would be filled with risks for Russia. Failure or prolonged resistance would turn Russia from a reemerging power into a nation to be discounted.

Will no advisor tell Putin he is effing up royally? 

I still wonder if Putin will take down Russia with him by risking war with NATO.

Heck, maybe this is just one last gasp for a cheap diplomatic victory in the west--even if Putin has to pretend he bullied the West--before Russia must pivot east to face China, which is the true threat to Russia. 

#WhyRussiaCan'tHaveNiceThings

UPDATE: The Russian army has problems no matter what the Russians try to portray. 

UPDATE: Related:

The Russian regime’s attempts to control Russians’ access to information exposes Putin’s greatest fear, the fear of all authoritarians, his own people.  He is right to worry; his war talk is wearing thin at home.

Come on, Putin! Boast about how the Russian people will willingly sacrifice 30 million people to fight NATO.

Weekend Data Dump

The media is unwilling to hold Biden responsible for Covid deaths on his watch rather than apply the standard Biden and the media used for Trump. Instead they've provided a daily two-minute hate for the usual "deplorable" suspects. 

As a rule I'm in favor of helping Ukraine fight Russia in the Donbas rather than risk having to fight Russia directly in Poland and Romania.

"Fact checking" is actually a leftist attempt to check--in the hockey sense--facts to separate them from the reader.

Iran's navies.

Trying to lighten the infantry load with robotic "mules." But I assume the infantry will still have to carry just as much yet will have to carry everything the heavily laden mule has if the mule breaks down.

More about the three stooges retired generals' (Easton, Taguba, and Anderson) "coup" oped that I condemned last week. Also, regarding the Oklahoma National Guard issue, members of the military only have the duty to obey lawful orders. I thought the question was whether the federal vaccine order is lawful. Maybe wait until that is decided to condemn, eh?

Remember when Russians hacked a gasoline pipeline? Remember the local shortages that resulted? Well that towering intellect of foppish foolishness, John Kerry, has been more broadly sabotaging our fossil fuels industry. If a Russian was doing the same thing, we'd declare war on Russia.

The empire holds the line: "Tigrayan rebels announced Monday they have withdrawn from Ethiopia's Amhara and Afar regions and retreated to their Tigray stronghold[.]"

The "experts" are insane if they think Manchin doomed the planet. Seriously nuts.

Via Instapundit: "What Might War in Space Even Look Like? Think fewer missiles and more radio jammers and cyber attacks[.]" Well, maybe. Until one side starts losing the jamming and cyber battle. Then the missiles and other kinetics come out. I don't think there is a free cyber (and electronic) lunch.

The idea that we don't need to worry about terrorism in America because since September 12, 2001 (note the day before that is excluded) more people die in America from lightning is ridiculous. If we let our guard down against lightning, lightning won't take advantage of that laxity to kill us in the thousands--if not millions. Nor do some complain about lightningphobia, I'll add.

We're from the government, and we're here to help make housing prices higher. But don't worry, the government won't have to pay for its folly. Taxpayers will. Tip to Instapundit.

Democratic mayor of Boston says people must be vaccinated to enter public places (via Instapundit):

Pakistan: situation desperate and absolutely serious.

Allegedly satire: "In a catastrophic blow to democracy with disastrous consequences sure to ripple throughout the free world, a majority of democratically-elected representatives decided against legislation proposed by other democratically-elected representatives." Tip to The Morning Briefing.

I assumed Chinese spies have infiltrated the Taiwanese military. I just hope there aren't enough to throw the Taiwanese military into confusion if China invades, in cooperation with infiltrated special forces.

It is true that China's army is no longer a massive peasant army. It is now a symmetrical challenge to us. Which can be a problem. But it is also an opportunity because of America's superior experience with such an army. And China can no longer rely on flinging peasant soldiers at enemies and enduring massive casualties. Which might be a problem considering China's experience.

The European Union doesn't have any democratic accountability for its European Defence Fund to promote Europe-wide defense industry. Why should democratic accountability be different than any other EU institution? The EU will crush the freedom and democracy that America spread in Europe after World War II.

If the Xi Jinping Flu means Americans can never get back to normal and must get used to a new normal of government restrictions, as too many Democrats say, does this mean China engineered the virus to do this? After all, the Spanish Flu a century ago faded away in two years. If so, how is this virus different than a Chinese act of war?

To be fair to Fareed Zakaria, he couldn't find his own buttocks with both hands and a GPS signal. Via Instapundit. 

Is Biden doing too little, too late to defeat inflation before it gets entrenched?

Via Instapundit: "A mass of human brain cells in a petri dish has been taught to play Pong[.]" Big deal. Masses of human brain cells on couches teach themselves to play Call of Duty every day all across America.

Why are we taking policy direction from crazy and/or stupid people? Via Instapundit.

I hope we actually did this years ago, and the current team reminded Russia of what America could do if Russia persists in threatening Ukraine: "A small Department of Defense team recently returned from Ukraine after a trip to that country to discuss and evaluate its air and missile defense needs." Also, naval, electronic warfare and cyber needs were supposedly looked at.

The threat goes up. It goes down. Up. And now down: "A combination of hunger, fewer places to loot and more danger from the security forces or armed civilians Boko Haram and its more radical spinoff ISWAP a less attractive career option for the many young Moslem men who are poor, unemployed, and angry." Locally, fix corruption. Big picture: the normals need to beat the Islamist jihadis in the Islamic Civil War.

Saudi Arabia wants more Patriot missile batteries and needs PAC-3 missile resupply.

Germany wants to dispatch a token naval presence to the Pacific regularly.

Demand for allied air power down in CENTCOM. But the jihadi threat is up after the Taliban victory. Who knew over-the-horizon air strikes on jihadis would be hard?

Are Western analysts and policy makers way too optimistic about China correcting its slow-motion economic problems?

Freedom of navigation in the Black Sea is vital for Romania, which has not made enough progress in projecting power into the sea. I think NATO has less interest in focusing attention there.

Well of course critical race theory concepts are being taught to our children in schools. That curriculum of hate and victimhood must be stopped. These leftist and racist loons think you can identify as anything at all--except as American. 

Making tank killing fun and easy: "The U.S. State Department has approved the potential sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to the government of Lithuania[.]"

Well, if Biden isn't the meat sack propped up by a team of rival staff that he appears to be, he has a lot to answer for. Tip to Instapundit.

Well that's good, considering we know China can engineer a deadly virus: "Within weeks, scientists at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research expect to announce that they have developed a vaccine that is effective against COVID-19 and all its variants, even Omicron, as well as previous SARS-origin viruses that have killed millions of people worldwide." Tip to PJ Media.

Yes, America faces three empires trying to claw back territory and glory: China, Russia, and Iran. Add the Ottomans, jihadis and their caliphate dreams, and the European Union to that--and yes, the EU is a threat--and that's quite the problem.

An American carrier is in the Mediterranean Sea while and amphibious ready group is in the Gulf of Aden.

I'm so old I remember when wanting this was outrageous: "Japan has agreed to increase its share of funding for U.S. troops stationed in Japan to 1.06 trillion yen, or $9.3 billion, over the next five years[.]"

Unless Russia overruns big chunks of Ukraine's east and Black Sea coast, I don't think major NATO reinforcements of the Black Sea region are justified.

The United States dropped more bombs over Afghanistan in August 2021 than it had since October 2020. And if the Afghan security forces on the ground hadn't felt abandoned by America's skedaddle, that might have mattered. Air power cannot replace ground power.

I assume this can't replace Russian natural gas, but it helps reduce blackmail options: "Cold-stricken Europe is drawing a flotilla of U.S. liquefied natural gas cargoes amid an energy crisis that has sent gas prices to record levels."

But consequences of their actions are only supposed to affect the little people! Tip to Instapundit.

The Washington Post found some ugly opinions from soldiers just back from World War II. Shockingly, some of them expressed views that are commonly viewed as ugly 75 years later. So the entire generation should be cancelled? We should not expect them to be perfect. They are human, flawed, and raised in an older society. We expected them to fight and die to defeat Nazis, Fascists, and militarists. They did that. Just stop.

An inflation disaster. 

VR for combat training and enhancing combat situational awareness.

I think North Korea's military capabilities, whether nuclear or conventional, are grossly overstated. The nuclear missiles probably don't work and the army is better thought of as a prison to keep revolution-age males under control and kept too busy to kill the masters. I worry more about North Korea selling nuclear weapons to Iran.

It's bad enough that Fauci says he is science. But now the woke-controlled Democrats claim they are democracy. Trump is their new Goldstein. We can only dream of just two minutes of hate per day. FFS, Trump peacefully left office despite believing the election was rigged. He didn't prevent the left from seizing control of the federal government. Yet he'll stage a coup in the next election? Or the one after that? What is wrong with these loons?

Democrats don't consider it gerrymandering when they do it. Also, mask rules don't apply to them. No victory is enough for them. They'll politically cleanse the state yet. Also, "nonpartisan" redistricting commissions evolve into leftist bodies over time.

As the article notes, only building them is new: "US intelligence agencies believe Saudi Arabia is building its own ballistic missiles with Chinese technology, CNN reported, citing people familiar with the findings." Forty years ago the Saudis had Chinese-made missiles capable of holding a (Pakistani?) nuclear warhead. The Saudis might not be as confident of American support these days.

About that CNN pedophile monster: "I miss the old days, when somebody like this would get pulled apart by a team of horses while the townspeople cheered."

I must say it is refreshing to have something cancelled for being rubbish. And also, LOL! Tip to Treacher.

"Better dead than rude" is stronger than ever in America.

If China takes over Taiwan, China "will use subversion, rather than brute force, as that seems to be its preferred approach." I don't know. When the PRC has gone up against America/UN (in Korea), India, and Vietnam, it sure seemed to throw the conventional military kitchen sink at them.

So what the study is saying is that McDonald's advertises in the markets they're in? "Fast-food chain McDonald's may be targeting children in lower middle-income countries globally with marketing messages[.]" The horror. I wonder it they [shudders] offer Happy Meals?!

Kamala Harris claimed she'd get better media treatment if she was a white male. So exactly like the fawning coverage of Mike Pence, eh? Or maybe Dick Cheney? Or was it Dan Quayle she had in mind?

It's almost like reality is striking them with the clue bat (via Instapundit): "Two Democrats who supported police reform in Philadelphia and Chicago were both carjacked at gunpoint within 24 hours of each other." "Reform!"

So: "In the landlocked central African nation of Mali there is still a large amount of Islamic terrorism and violent tribal feuds." If the jihadis would stay there I honestly wouldn't care too much. The kind of armored vehicles involved matters much less than the normals winning the Islamic Civil War.

Do it: "The Pentagon is working on a plan to provide Ukraine with battlefield intelligence that could help the country more quickly respond to a possible Russian invasion[.]" Remember what Putin did to us. But the concern is Russia's ire over this plan that won't happen if there is no war and not our ire over Russia invading Ukraine.

China starts putting memories of Hong Kong freedom and democracy down the memory hole: "Universities in Hong Kong are removing memorials to the bloody suppression of the 1989 Chinese pro-democracy movement centered on Beijing’s Tiananmen Square."

Honestly, it would be surprising if Russia provided plain information. #WhyRussiaCan'tHaveNiceThings

Clear and effective warfighting skills? Not so much. "Citing the need for clear and effective communication, the Air Force has authorized the optional use of gender pronouns he/him, she/her and they/them in electronic signature blocks for official email correspondence."

The ceasefire is (again) on in the Donbas. Until it breaks them, perhaps to take more land, Russia likes ceasefires because it keeps them in control of the land they took from Ukraine.

And on the India-China border which China continuously tests, the military build ups continue. China really has a talent for pissing off neighbors.

LOL, via Instapundit:

This is supposed to reassure me: "China is unlikely to strike Taiwan — at least for the next couple of months. And for that we can thank the upcoming Olympics in Beijing, which don’t begin until Feb. 4." I'm not comforted. I may only have been wrong about timing. We're past the typhoon season.

The damaged sub is home. Let's hope the Navy can return Connecticut to service after the advanced Seawolf-class sub's mishap with a South China Sea underwater mountain.

Japan and Britain will cooperate on a next-generation fighter engine. Japan gets better capabilities to defend against China while Britain gains a powerful technology partner outside of the European Union. 

Don't overstate the "closeness" of China-Russia ties. The two are frenemies with temporary benefits. And each would prefer the other to fight America alone.

As a rule, two broad groups oppose American military strength: Our enemies. And Americans who side with our enemies. The proper debate is whether to fight not whether to be capable of fighting. Via Instapundit.

This is what Seattle's policies predictably create. I say let the voters enjoy what they voted for! Via Instapundit.

When Red state science deniers got the Xi Jinping Flu, it was their own damn stupid fault for failing to follow The Science. Now that Blue state elites are getting it, well, what can you do? Just learn to live with it!

It's a Festivus Miracle airing of grievances! Tip to PJ Media. 

This week I'll get my Xi Jinping Flu booster. I made the appointment weeks ago and have been debating it since. It will be my second shot. It is 1/4 driven by health concerns--while healthy I am getting up there. But 3/4 is driven by my desire to travel. I have little confidence that the federal government won't vindictively deny people access to air travel if they have not gotten a booster shot. My intention is not to get another. And honestly, if the government announced all limits on public life based on vaccination status are lifted, I'm almost positive I'd cancel my appointment.

Memories of better leaders:

America said Israel will have to wait for new KC-46 tanker planes: "Israel suspects the Americans are also trying to make it more difficult for the Israelis to carry out a massive air attack on Iranian nuclear facilities." I don't think Israel is waiting for those tankers.

LOL!

I saw a headline on Yahoo!News saying a father used a "vulgar insult" against Biden on a Christmas NORAD phone call. One, it wasn't vulgar. It was a euphemism for a vulgar insult. And if you moved past the headline the story did state that, to be fair. Two, there were no media complaints about actual vulgarities on a massive scale delivered against a certain past president. And three, Biden was using the parent and child for his own publicity stunt, so I have no sympathy for that going awry with someone who doesn't support Biden. Just remember, that father didn't kill himself.

The war in Yemen continues: "The Saudi-led coalition on Saturday launched a "large-scale" assault on Yemen after missiles fired by Iran-backed Huthi rebels killed two people in the kingdom, the first such deaths in three years."

Well the women had that going for them. Which was ... nice? But honestly, I'm going to assume this is satire and not an actual headline! [A day later I checked. It is old but real. FFS]

Short explanation: The Taliban lied about wanting peace but we chose to believe them. When only one side is trying to win a war it should not be a shock that the side that tried to win actually won. 

Some things don't suck: "The world’s largest and most powerful space telescope rocketed away Saturday[.]"

I really hope the "mixed reality" infantry goggles don't rely on being connected to a battlefield internet. And just in case, maybe only equip one troop per fire team with the goggles so the entire unit doesn't blunder into an ambush that hacking has concealed. 

Okay, one more because I busted a spleen (a lot of good ones this week):

I learned something useful. Money supply in circulation (M1) has risen a lot recently. But it is not nearly vertical as a recent chart going the web around implies. The government changed the definition of M1 to include money in savings accounts. So that was a one-time addition. Again, our government  money "printing" has still raised M1 too much. But not as bad as it looks. Always check the definitions section, I've always said.

Australia switches to American helicopters.

The British fleet is in fact pretty small considering its global role. Indeed, one hit might effectively knock it out. Although short of great power war, there is logic to the plan.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa passed away. I wonder if this opponent of Apartheid was shocked at the New Apartheid of racial separation that woke Americans are imposing where they have control?

I assume the Biden administration is already preparing to drop everything to fix this "first:" "Israeli forces clashed with Palestinians in the West Bank in an area that has seen a recent uptick in friction, the Israeli military and Palestinian medics said."

Is it just me? Or is the American Medical Association telling minority patients that their health problems are somebody else's fault and nothing they can do as an individual matter? I want my doctor to treat me, the individual, and not my demographic cohort. 

It is interesting that my traffic is significantly higher this year than it has been in a long time. It is higher on any full year since I added a new statistics counter near the end of 2016. And even with Blogger stats it looks higher than any time since 2011. It still is not regularly at pre-Twitter levels, but it is a bit surprising. And encouraging.

Totally rational and in accordance with Science, I'm sure. This crisis needs to be declare over to remove the power of these volunteer brown shirts vests. Tip to PJ Media.

One thing about the January 6th riots that I've changed my mind about is the punishments. Certainly, I think it is wrong--and downright nuts--to speak of the riots as an insurrection. But it should not be compared to Antifa/BLM riots in other cities, despite the far higher death and destruction cumulatively of the latter. Both are very bad. But the federal government is right to protect the Capitol Building more than a city federal building or some random fast food restaurant from trespassing and riots. Mind you, state and local governments should smack that down hard. But that's different. That said, if people merely trespassed on January 6th, punish them for that and don't treat it as close to treason. And for God's sake, let most of the people held out on bail until their trials. This looks not like justice but like the Biden administration holding political prisoners. And yes, the "othering" of conservatives has been going on a while. And here we are. It would be interesting to see what the punishments were for past trespassing and attacks on the Capitol Building. I'd like to be surprised that leftists got serious punishment.

And Now For Something Completely Different

On the twelfth day of Christmas my true blog gave to me, a handful of adequate memes. We're gonna need some more memes, I guess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fauci Rules Will Never Expire

Is Santa Claus coming to town? Don't know. But it is time to get your little ones ready for a Xi Jinping Flu Omicron Variant Winter of Severe Illness and Death, after seeing what's under the Covid Tree tomorrow!

 

"Fauci Rules Will Never Expire"

[Chorus] 

You better watch out
You better not scoff
You better not pout
He's gonna get tough, Fauci rules will never expire 

He's making a list
He's checking your mask
He's going to find out
Who's gotten the vax, Fauci rules will never expire

[Pre-Chorus] 

He sees you when you're shopping
He knows when you're not home
He knows when you are masked or not
So mask up and do not roam

[Chorus] 

You better watch out
You better not scoff
You better not pout
He's gonna get tough, Fauci rules will never expire
You better watch out
You better not scoff
You better not pout
He's gonna get tough, Fauci rules will never expire
He's making a list
He's checking your mask
He's going to find out
Who's gotten the vax, Fauci rules will never expire 

[Pre-Chorus] 

He sees you when you're shopping
He knows when you're not home
He knows when you are masked or not
So mask up and do not roam

[Chorus] 

You better watch out
You better not scoff
You better not pout
He's gonna get tough, Fauci rules will never expire

 [Pre-Chorus] 

He sees you when you're shopping
He knows when you're not home
He knows when you are masked or not
So mask up and do not roam

[Chorus] 

You better watch out
You better not scoff
You better not pout
He's gonna get tough, Fauci rules will never expire
He's making a list
He's checking your mask
He's going to find out
Who's gotten the vax, Fauci rules will never expire
Fauci rules will never expire
Fauci rules will never expire
Fauci rules will never expire 

But I hope you have a Merry C.H.R.I.S.T.M.A.S., anyway!

Thanks to these folks for the original lyrics.

The Thucydides Trap and the Map. Oh Snap!

Whether or not China or Russia are closing the gap with American power or reaching peak relative power, the reality of how the power on both sides is arranged means little change in actual power at the point of contact in the short run.

Is the real Thucydides Trap that China and Russia are in decline and might strike while they can? 

The rising threat of high-intensity state-on-state war is driven by the growing elite conviction in Beijing and Moscow that their power disadvantage relative to the U.S. and its allies will worsen unless they move soon, making victory increasingly unattainable.

Hmm. I was highly skeptical that the trap was true when China was rising. 

The Thucydides Trap refers to the Greek writer Thucydides who described the long struggle between Athens and Sparta, writing that Sparta and Athens had to clash as Athens reacted to the prospect of losing their dominance (and let's gloss over whether a pro-Athenian attitude was just an attempt to clear Athens of any wrongdoing). ...

Sheer distance is a lubricant that reduces friction and decisions made in fear of dramatic loss. The power shift between America and Britain with the Atlantic between us did not result in a hammer and tongs, all-out war between us to decide who runs things.

America and China have such distance between our countries. America and Russia, too, for that matter, notwithstanding the Alaska-Russia sea border.

Now that the China-America power shift that prompted the Thucydides Trap worries might never happen, there is no reason to actually worry more about war. Long before now and long into the future, China and Russia will have the advantage of deploying military power to strike close and much weaker neighboring targets while superior American power is far away. 

So put away the Thucydides Trap for now. And focus on what China or Russia could do if they choose war for reasons other than the big picture correlation-of-forces trends.

No Plan Survives Contact With Our Own Leadership

Until we have leadership that prioritizes winning the wars we fight, our troops will always fight with a handicap even before the enemy starts to act against our plans.

I reject the conventional wisdom that America's problems in the Afghanistan campaign stem from not committing troops for the duration of a war:

I know it is almost required to sagely note that America didn't fight a twenty-year was in Afghanistan, but fought 20 1-year wars. Troops rotated home. I don't buy this as the reason for losing the war. Note that nobody says our troops should have been sent for the duration. Or even for their full term of enlistment. Our NCOs and officers returned at higher levels of command. We certainly won on the battlefields of Iraq by 2009 using 9-15-month tours. I would really love to see an analysis of Taliban fighters. Have they been in the fight 20 years? Or did the Taliban recruit for spring offensives year after year with new foot soldiers?

Say, here's some information relevant to my position. Ahem: 

Both [Russian] pilots and ground troops served in Syria for short periods, like three to six months at a time.

That extreme rotation policy didn't prevent Russia from saving the Assad regime. 

Oddly, Russian troops probably didn't stay long enough to get that precious "understanding" of enemies allegedly required to beat them. Again, I call BS, which struck me based on a book I read:

[What] bothered me was just one sentence that said America lost in Vietnam because we didn't understand our enemies or the place. I think that conventional wisdom is nonsense.  ... 

Did America understand North African culture to (basically) win the Tripolitan War?

Did America understand Mexican culture to win the Mexican War?

Did America understand Spanish culture to win the Spanish-American War?

I could go on all the way to the 21st century, but let me just ask, did we understand Japanese culture to win the Pacific campaign in World War II?

I honestly don't think we had a clue about any of that. Heck, I don't think the Union had any more clue about the Confederate culture in our own Civil War than the Confederates had about Union culture.

You could go around the world for similar results.

Too often in modern America, those pushing for "understanding" our enemies seemingly have the goal of claiming our enemies--not America--deserve to win.

Mind you, Russia didn't recover most of Syria for Assad. But Assad's core region remains secure. That was victory enough for Russia. Sadly, Americans require more. As we wanted in Afghanistan:

I have to ask: Just what do you expect victory to look like?  We invaded a Moslem tribal society that has a way to go to reach the 19th century. We don't have a functioning rule of law democracy with bike path debates there. What we do have is a place with enough local allies killing jihadis for us that is not a sanctuary to hatch plots to fly hijacked planes filled with our people into our buildings filled with our people. I don't understand how anyone can say the war was futile and that we lost.

The fact is, you win by first defeating the enemy's power and will to fight. America seems to have too many military lawyers getting in the way of victory. Our leaders put them there and gave them that authority, elevating many substitutes for victory.

And when we don't get our perfect victory we are tempted to skeddaddle right into actual defeat--while pretending we won by hanging the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the shit show of our defeat.

We don't have a troop rotation problem. Or an "understanding" problem. We have a senior leadership problem that cannot decide that winning a war is a higher priority than so many other substitutes dear to our leaders.

And is our leadership even aware they have a problem? Is the American military's ability to defend America crippled by arrogance, ignorance, and incompetence (via Instapundit)? At this point my default view is that is true until proven otherwise.

I nearly despair of our military leadership fixing itself. What level of American defeat is required to motivate them to fix this problem? And will it be too late to fix at that point? 

UPDATE: Very relevant:

The officers published in the Washington Post are clueless as to why the military is now suffering its most dismal public approval ratings of the modern era — with only 45 percent of the public registering trust and confidence in their armed forces.

The nation is clearly not blaming the courageous soldiers in the enlisted ranks. But it has had enough of the Pentagon’s loud top brass who seem more interested in stirring up political divisions at home than adopting winning strategies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, or deterring China and Russia. ...

To restore the military’s reputation, officers should eschew politics to focus on restoring strategic deterrence and military readiness. ...

But most importantly, officers should quit all their coup porn talk — either to remove a president they don’t like, or to project their own reckless, insurrectionary behavior onto their political opponents.

Do read it all.

I'd add that there is still confidence in officers below flag rank. 

I've lost confidence in our top brass. Me. They lost me.

Friction is Our Friend

Allowing the unnatural Russia-China alignment to continue without trying to disrupt it is stupid. Actually getting in the way of Russia-China friction is echelon above stupid.

This is a stupid way of looking at our strategy for dealing with Russia and China: 

Russia last week announced a major new energy cooperation deal with India that threatens the very core of the U.S.’s fightback strategy against Beijing’s and Moscow’s expansionism in the Middle East and beyond.

I'm almost driven speechless by the stupidity that motivates criticism of Russian-Indian ties.

India is an enemy of China. China is trying to use its new power to bully India.

The Russian-Chinese "alliance" is abnormal and a danger if it continues to turn Russia into China's vassal state. It is good to get the Chinese angry with Russian ties to India, whether with Russian arms sales or energy deals, as I wrote recently:

Plan B: "Russian President Vladimir Putin lauded India as 'a great power' on Monday as he arrived in New Delhi to bolster military and energy ties with a traditional ally being courted by Washington." Russia needs to keep India friendly for the time Russia needs to pivot to confront China. Also, it would be sheer idiocy for America to sanction India for buying Russian weapons that will face China. Never underestimate the damage Smart Diplomacy® can inflict.

It is good to strengthen India to face China. China threatens America and India, and we don't want India losing to China or being pressured into submission.

And it is good to strain Russian-Chinese ties by having Russia strengthen India, as Russia is doing:

Russia will remain an important security and diplomatic partner of India’s for the foreseeable future. Even as New Delhi has diversified its defense suppliers in recent years—with major purchases of U.S., European, and Israeli hardware—the Indian military still remains heavily dependent on Russia to maintain its legacy military platforms. Russia is also the only country willing to offer India nuclear submarine technology, while Pentagon officials admit they did not have a direct alternative to the S-400 to offer India.

Apparently, Russia can't let go of the fake NATO threat. So Russia needs a bigger whack with the clue bat to pivot to the Chinese threat to Russia. Perhaps China will be angry enough to give Russia that whack.

Strengthening India and splitting Russia from China are actual cores of American strategy to fight back against Russian and Chinese hostility. Or should be.

For God's sake, end America's Smart Diplomacy® before we cripple our national security.

UPDATE: Oops. I corrected the post to what I hope was the obvious "Strengthening India and ..." conclusion. Fast fingers.

No Short and Glorious War for Putin

In the short run, even inferior states can mass superior power at the closer point of conflict. But what then? Yet what if the short run is the effective horizon of the inferior but locally superior state hoping for the best after that?

This article explains that Russia has the short-term advantage in deploying combat power to Ukraine despite NATO's superior power:

The good news is that Putin almost certainly understands that an invasion of Ukraine would lead to a complete break in relations with the West, rendering Russia in effect a dependent junior partner of China. Moreover, he probably realizes that Russian forces would very likely have to deal with guerrilla resistance in occupied Ukrainian territory, and that unoccupied portions of western Ukraine could become a host for U.S. and NATO forces over the longer term. It is doubtful that these are outcomes he finds appealing. He would probably prefer to find an alternative way to derail a U.S. alliance with Ukraine if Biden is prepared to bargain. But if Washington refuses to recognize that Russian redline, he may well be prepared to fight—and there is not much the United States could do to stop him.

I've droned on about that issue of locally superior power in the short run concerning Chinese threats and Russian threats.

And yes, a NATO intervention into eastern Ukraine would be very limited and probably not decisive. Even NATO air power would be scantily supported and more symbolic than decisive. It would take a lot of time to mobilize forces, establish the logistics, and move forces into Poland, Romania, and western Ukraine.

Yet I don't think Russia 's military is as potent as the authors claim, whether against NATO or Ukraine.

Russia's brilliant Crimea takeover in winter 2014 was reliant on special circumstances.

And the Russian invasion of Ukraine's Donbas just half a year later bogged down short of taking all of the region against unexpected Ukrainian resistance that continued to foil Russian hopes.

Ukraine is way more prepared now than in summer 2014. Russia is better, too. But does Russia's improvement match Ukraine's improvement?

I don't think so. The simple fact that Russia's invasion threat has to be backed by so many more troops this time indicates Russia needs more of its military to make a credible threat. 

Mind you, the increase in Russian quantity may make up for the narrowing of the quality gap since 2014. But that means of ensuring Russian superiority has a critical weakness--Russian casualties.

Russian troops could probably plow their way to the Dnieper River line. But how many dead Russians can Putin endure to do that?

I think the scope of a large invasion from Kiev to the Black Sea is too much for Russia to sustain for long. Putting 100 battalion tactical groups into an invasion must surely hollow out every combat brigade across all of Russia. Those BTGs are a means of scraping something out of less-than-adequate brigades. And I suspect a large fraction of those 100 aren't very good given the state of the Russian army. How many ill-trained conscripts were needed to fill out that number of units?

Here's a good explanation of Russia's situation against Ukraine.

How long does Russia think it can afford to fight in Ukraine against surviving Ukrainian army units on the other side of the Dnieper River? With insurgents and irregulars tormenting second-rate Russian occupying troops? With Ukraine getting and using longer range missiles to bombard Russia's bases in Crimea? Without tempting Russia's enemies around their long border to take advantage in some way? Without breaking Russian logistics? Without crippling Russia's economy? Without inspiring public resistance to excessive Russian casualties?

Will the body bags going back to Russia stop when Russia declares victory?

All the problems the authors describe probably give Russia a lot of problems for that "ideal" river line defensive position. Russia may think it can threaten with nukes out of that dilemma, but the threat isn't credible. Russia says it needs Ukrainian territory as a buffer against destruction of Russia by an invasion NATO can't carry out; but Russia will risk immediate nuclear destruction to hold the buffer?

Ukraine might even endure enough pain to finally rouse themselves to eliminate the power of the oligarchs, who thrive on corruption. I've long argued that Ukraine must defeat corruption to avoid being a smaller and weaker version of Russia.

But it gets worse for Russia. China isn't Russia's ally. Russia is a junior partner of China right now. If Russia alienates NATO for a generation at least, China knows Russia loses the ability to flip to the West to resist Chinese land claims against Russia in the Far East. 

And with Russia needing all of its decent military units to hold their new buffer plus its border with freshly outraged and worried NATO countries, how does Russia get any leverage to deter Chinese claims on Russian Far East territory?

What will China demand from its vassal Russia to remain Russia's de facto protector?

I'd say this situation argues for Russian caution. I'd say they settle for some diplomatic victory whether real or imaginary. Or maybe a brief punitive mission with artillery strikes. And maybe even a minor expansion of territory under Russian control. But with the Fuck-Up Fairy living in Moscow full time, who knows whether Putin will destroy Russia in pursuit of his glory?

Have a super sparkly day. 

UPDATE: This answers one question I've had about Russia's build up:

The build-up this time has been much more serious, in terms of not just the teeth but the tail. They have put a lot of effort into making sure that there is all the logistical backup, which is what you need for a real attack.

Putin could fight a war. That's different than whether it is a good idea or whether Putin or even Russia can survive that war.