A Fully-Fledged Geopolitical Union Emerges From the Brussels Swamp

The proto-imperial European Union apparatchiki care about nothing more than ridding themselves of that troublesome prefix. 

This is all consistent:

Von der Leyen proclaimed that the EU had already matured into a fully-fledged geopolitical union through its support for Ukraine and its stance toward an increasingly assertive China. In a run-up to the December 2023 EU-China Summit, the Balticconnector incident tested Brussels’ commitment to hold Beijing accountable for challenging European security. The incident lent credence to the argument that Beijing was not merely leaning on Moscow’s side but also providing direct economic and technical support to the Russian war effort. The EU’s response was nowhere to be seen, neglecting to support Estonia or Finland and leaving them to deal with Beijing alone. This development raises serious questions about the EU’s geopolitical outreach at the start of 2024. 

Let's even set aside the absurd notion that Von de Leyen is up to making the EU a robust military power. The basic problem is that EU has no particular interest in supporting Estonia and Finland for the purpose of actually helping Estonia and Finland. They'll oppose Russia--or reach out to it--to gain the authority to have a relationship with Russia.

The EU wants power--the "strategic autonomy" it drones on about so often--to defeat the only foreign enemy it truly fears--the United States--which stands in the way of their imperial desires:

[Reduced American military presence in Europe and Euro pressure to replace NATO with the EU are] allowing Europeans to revert to their pre-World War II nature of being a mix of autocracy, monarchy, and democracy. I had to be reminded by this author that our long period of influence in Europe during the Cold War had a role in making Europe truly democratic:

It is easy to forget--and this was a useful reminder to me--that Europe with its autocracies and monarchies was not fully part of a free West (although obviously part of the Western tradition) until we rebuilt Western Europe in that template after World War II. And NATO expansion after defeating the Soviet Union was more explicit in demanding democracy and rule of law for new members.

The little people of the small member states are just today's tiny pieces on the board easier to push around. Don't buy their kinder and gentler empire image.

And please, stop talking about Europe when you mean the European Union. That sleight of hand is deliberate to ease you through that no-man's land between friendly, safe geographic Europe where you vacationed to tooth-and-claw political Europe under the firm control of Brussels and its legions of bureaucrats smothering geographic Europe in the red tape of 10,000 cheese regulations:

The Soviet Union relied on lots of tanks and secret police to keep their restive imperial provinces in line. And in the end it was not enough.

Who knew that 10,000 cheese regulations would have been more effective in tying the imperial provinces to the motherland?

All the talk in that initial article about what "Europe"--that is, the EU--is failing to do in its own neighborhood lets you just ease past the question of whether the EU should have that power rather than NATO with American leadership. 

The EU should not have that power. Unless freedom and liberty are unwanted in a geographic Europe pining for political Europe:

The Euro elites wrongly claim that the European Union itself has given Europe its long peace since World War II. They despise NATO and America so much that they actually believe their own BS.

The sad fact is that without America, the USSR would have conquered Western Europe.

And without America's continued influence Europe will revert to its norm of autocracies and intra-European violence.

The EU may change focus, but the ultimate goal remains constant.

UPDATE: Why is the EU running a parallel Red Sea merchant ship protection operations separate from America's? 

The EU is determined “to forge its own identity in the military realm distinct from NATO, which it sees as US-dominated,” said David Des Roches, associate professor at the Near East South Asia Center for Security Studies. “They have set up parallel operations to NATO operations going back years. In this instance, they also do not want to be seen as part of a US operation, which they fear will have an offensive component.”

US officials have stressed that Prosperity Guardian is a “defensive coalition” and is separate from the offensive American and British military strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, but it appears some European capitals see value in daylight between the two missions anyway.

Why? Seriously?  

Because the power to run such a mission is more important to the proto-imperial EU than the objective of the mission. 

And the EU knows that its more passive mission will rely on the offensive component that America is--so far half-heartedly--leading.

UPDATE: Huh:

U.S. military officials are working with the European Union to review an incident in which German frigate Hessen fired twice at an MQ-9 drone earlier this week during a multinational naval protection mission in the Red Sea.

My initial thought is that the EU despises America. So maybe we should take a close look at the EU rules of engagement.

But upon sober reflection, this is probably just an issue of the Germans being out of practice. Let's hope that when this is over the EU-sent Germans do more damage to the Houthi than to us.

Kidding aside, it sounds like it was our fault.

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E. And yeah, the random nonsensical text put in the image was too good not to incorporate.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Another ESB Joins the Fleet

USS John L. Canley joins the fleet to project power in non-intense environments.

Another mobile sea-based asset: 

The Navy will commission the future USS John L. Canley (ESB 6) as the newest Expeditionary Sea Base ship (ESB)[.]

These aren't replacements for the amphibious warfare ships the Navy has to send Marines ashore against opposition:

ESB 6 joins the USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB 3), USS Hershel "Woody" Williams (ESB 4), USS Miguel Keith (ESB 5) which support a variety of maritime-based missions, including Special Operations Forces (SOF) and Airborne Mine Counter Measures (AMCM). ESBs have a four-spot flight deck, mission deck, and hangar, designed around four core capabilities: aviation facilities, berthing, equipment staging support, and command and control assets.

But they are useful in peacetime power projection missions or in lower threat level areas in war. I don't think they'd hold up during war near a peer--or even against the Houthis, for that matter.

More about the ships here.

I like to flatter myself that ESBs are the non-duct tape versions of The AFRICOM Queen I proposed in Military Review.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Comrades! The Memory Hole Has Been Activated!

Much as American leftists spun on a dime from demanding America remain neutral in World War II when the Nazi-Soviet pact was active to demanding aid to Britain and the USSR once Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union, Western progressives are switching their views on World War II because the Bad Orange Man gave an opinion on the war. It's complicated. And has lessons for the Winter War of 2022.

The Bad Orange Man said the USSR defeated Nazi Germany. Progressives went insane.

Look, I'm not siding with Trump on this. The community note on X pointed out that Russia did indeed endure the most casualties of the allies and inflicted the most casualties on the Germans. 

Yet even aside from Russia's massive casualties in large part stemming from Stalin's complete disregard for the lives of his subjects he sent to fight, there is more to the issue. 

Russia also had a major role in starting the war that Stalin hoped would destroy Germany and the West while he prepared to sweep up the broken survivors. See that Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact I mentioned that split Poland and eastern Europe between the two of them in 1939.

I pointed out the complexity of the issue when progressives were losing their minds over five years ago claiming the USSR defeated Nazi Germany and thus gets the credit for ending the Holocaust:

--The Soviet communists had no problem enabling the Nazis with the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact--even as Nazi Germany ramped up persecution of German Jews, telegraphing their hatred--that green-lighted Germany's invasion of Poland in exchange for Russia getting a free hand against Finland (which lost territory but defended their independence in a bloody war), Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, parts of Romania, and the eastern portion of Poland. ...

--The Soviets only fought the Nazis because the Nazis rapidly defeated France and inflicted a military defeat on Britain, knocking them back to their island nation, and then invaded the USSR. Had Hitler not attacked the expanded Soviet Union, Stalin would have been happy to watch the Western allies and Germany batter each other--all while Hitler slaughtered Jews--until the USSR was ready to break the pact and attack Germany. Clearly, the Soviet communists wanted to defeat Nazi Germany--not to stop the Holocaust.

I just popped into my timeline for the parts to address this point. 

I also noted the Western role that the community note pointed out--you can't dismiss the West's vital role in enabling Russia to defeat Hitler on the Eastern Front:

[Without] American, British, and Commonwealth military offensives in the air and on the ground, plus massive military and civilian aid shipped to the USSR at high cost in the face of German interdiction, the Soviets would not have marched on Berlin. Even with Western armies, navies, air forces, and direct aid, the Soviets lost at least 25 million people to defeat the Nazis. How much more could they have (or would they have) endured without Western participation in the war? If the Russians managed to push the Germans back to Minsk and Kiev (and without Western help the Russians might have been pushed east and unable to drive west)--but at the loss of 25 million just to get there--do you really think Stalin would have said that to stop the Holocaust he'd lose 25 million more rather than make another pact with Hitler and end the war, leaving Hitler to kill as many non-Russians as Hitler wanted?

But in 2024 progressives deny the USSR had a major role in defeating Hitler because the Bad Orange Man said what they once insisted was true. I've got whiplash trying to watch them spin.

Hell, progressives went from saying ending the Holocaust was a good thing to cheering on a small-scale version by Hamas while simultaneously arguing the Israelis exaggerate the rapes and killing--and deserved it. Just ... wow. The ability to change views and have multiple contradictory arguments to support your political objective is astounding.

Not that I let conservative critics of helping Ukraine off the hook. Allow me to use this kerfuffle to note that in World War II, Western help was vital to help the USSR kill most of the German troops who died in World War II and so defeat the aggressive Hitler who plunged Europe into war. 

I eagerly wait for isolationist conservatives to tell us that the Western Allies waged a "proxy war" on Nazi Germany by arming and sustaining the Soviet war effort. Which made it illegitimate. No? Anyone? Bueller?

Come on. Take the steps. Reducing our casualties ... by helping an ally who has a lot of incentive to fight our common enemy ... is the ... smart thing ... to do. Right?

My life would be a lot easier if I could switch my views to cater to the Lemming-like changes in consensus. But perhaps I share too much.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

The Winter War of 2022 Seeks a Reason to Live

So both parties don't want Ukraine to win their war against Russia's invasion? Let's look a little more closely, shall we?

ISW reflects on two years of open warfare. Is there a consensus in America that dooms Ukraine?

The dominant narrative today holds that Joe Biden and Donald Trump are opposites on Ukraine. The president supports the Senate bill that includes about $60 billion for Kyiv, mostly in military aid. The former president attacks it, and his influence among House Republicans is why Speaker Mike Johnson is reluctant to bring it to the floor for a vote. ...

Remember how Mr. Biden’s support for Ukraine started: He was backed into it. A month before Russia’s 2022 invasion, Mr. Biden predicted Russia would “move in” to Ukraine, but the NATO response might be divided if it were only a “minor incursion.”...

Mr. Putin’s invasion also came six months after Mr. Biden’s botched retreat from Afghanistan. The Biden administration was in danger of losing two big countries in its first two years. There was a need to shore up America’s collapsing credibility. ...

So here we are. Mr. Biden says we mustn’t give Mr. Putin a victory without quite committing himself to a Ukrainian victory. Mr. Trump says it’s “stupid” to give Kyiv anything but loans. Between the two, the American people aren’t getting the crucial debate about what we want the outcome to be and why. [emphasis added]

That highlighted part is key. I've long suspected Biden expected Ukraine to lose and that a paltry few billion in light arms and an evacuation of Ukraine's leadership before capture would show Biden tried. 

After his failure in Afghanistan, that's all he wanted. He thought an expected rapid Russian victory would lift the burden of sustaining that show of resolve:

I'll say again that I think Biden is accidentally supporting Ukraine. I think Biden was told Ukraine would lose fast. I think the early war shipments of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons were designed for a post-invasion Ukrainian insurgency. The arms would be a relatively cheap way for Biden to show resolve after needlessly losing Afghanistan. 

But Ukraine and Russia didn't cooperate with that political strategy. Russia effed up and Ukraine fought. Oops. Biden got trapped into backing Ukraine. And I worry he's looking for an exit ramp. 

Win-win. He'd say but for those darned Republicans, Ukraine would be free. His effort to blame Republicans would have merely started much earlier.

Indeed, I warned about the motive to show resolve after the Afghanistan defeat to restore credibility. While Biden should have showed resolve on Ukraine, I think he just wanted the show.

And the unconscionable holding Ukraine's fate hostage to Biden's bizarre determination to keep our southern border open to mass illegal immigration only makes some sort of twisted sense if you see this as a means of getting out of Biden's accidental commitment to Ukraine by blaming it on Republicans. 

Which the media goes along with by framing this as Republicans tying the southern border to Ukraine aid. When Biden actually did tie the southern border issue to Ukraine--and to Israel and Taiwan. It seems to me that House Republicans will allow aid if Democrats actually defend the southern border. Which is a more basic duty than helping Ukraine. So far Biden is only pretending to do that--with odd Senate Republican cooperation.

Mind you, I've long supported Ukraine. The record on TDR is clear and I don't understand why some conservatives have lost their resolve to resist Moscow's expansionist policies.

And as for Trump? The media and establishment consensus is that Trump's claim he could end the war in a day would consist of surrendering to Putin. Why is that considered the correct explanation? I mean, compare and contrast Trump to his predecessor Obama. Who was in thrall to Putin, eh?

And the author of the WSJ piece even bolsters my view of what Trump might do. The author says he wants aid to be in loans only. That isn't evidence of refusal to help Ukraine fight. But fits very well with my more rational extrapolation of what Trump would do:

Trump seems transactional in nature. Perhaps aid to Ukraine will rely more on Europeans paying for American weapons sent to Ukraine.

Perhaps there will be something akin to the "destroyers-for-bases" deal with Britain in 1940. Although I imagine instead of bases he'd want stakes in Ukrainian strategic natural resources.

Or maybe military aid would be paid for with assets seized from Russia.

Indeed, Trump's drive to get Europeans to do more in their backyard for defense could encompass Europeans giving Ukraine's loans to pay for American military equipment and services. Or using seized Russian assets to pay loans if Putin refuses to retreat from at least his conquests since 2022.

Heck, a future president more interested in Ukraine might direct student loan repayment money to Ukraine's loans rather than giving wealthy supporters a taxpayer-provided gift.

Doesn't that path make more sense than believing that unlike during his four years as president that Trump will abandon Ukraine--and kill off NATO while he's in the neighborhood?

But at least this opinion piece isn't totally stuck in the bubble of TDS that so much of our media lives in with no curiosity about what happens outside the event horizon.

And let's get a consensus that Ukraine should win and not merely avoid defeat. Because Russia has certainly remained focused on victory despite the time and unexpected high costs:

Russia’s overarching strategic objective in Ukraine, as first manifested in the 2014 invasion of Crimea and the Donbas, has been and remains the destruction of Ukraine’s sovereignty and the re-establishment of a pro-Russian Ukrainian government subservient to Moscow’s direction. ...

The Kremlin continues information operations to persuade Western audiences and leaders that Russia has limited objectives in Ukraine in order to fuel calls for negotiations on terms that would destroy Ukraine’s independence and damage the West.

Because in my book, in a contest between a side that that is trying to win and a side that is trying not to lose, the former has all the advantages. Let's get American military aid restarted.

We started to take Vienna. Take Goddamn Vienna!

UPDATE (Tuesday): Russia is grinding forward. Can Ukraine deny Russia freedom to concentrate forces anywhere on the front for a major offensive?

Russian forces will have the ability to maneuver reserve concentrations and determine how and where to allocate resources while forcing Ukraine to respond defensively as long as Russia maintains the strategic initiative. Ukrainian forces could deny Russia these opportunities if Ukrainian forces have enough means to challenge the Russian initiative and pursue their own offensive operations in 2024.

After 1943, the USSR had the initiative and was able to thin out forces along large stretches of the front in order to concentrate for an offensive, confident that Germany couldn't exploit that situation.

Our intelligence and surveillance assets should at least be able to make sure Ukraine knows of any weaknesses in Russia's front lines.

UPDATE (Wednesday): The notion peddled that Ukraine should retreat from cities it is defending to avoid unnecessary casualties is clearly false:

Russian forces are attempting to exploit tactical opportunities offered by the Russian seizure of Avdiivka and appear to be maintaining a relatively high tempo of offensive operations aimed at pushing as far as possible in the Avdiivka area before Ukrainian forces establish more cohesive and harder-to-penetrate defensive lines in the area. 

Russia didn't stop attacking after taking over the small city. Russia will just keep attacking through territory less suitable for Ukraine to defend.

Mind you, I was urging the withdrawal from Avdiivka for a while to avoid encirclement of Ukraine's defenders. But in general it is not wrong to stand on ground to inflict disproportionate casualties on the enemy.

I've drawn an analogy for policy from the battlefield reality that when you retreat you often get a lull in fighting intensity. But it is not a lull. It is regrouping. We see here the basis of my analogy.

UPDATE (Wednesday): Who knows? At some point perhaps the Ukrainians will basically allow the Russians to penetrate relatively deeply in order to strike the flanks of the advancing Russian troops and inflict a big battlefield victory while on the strategic defense. 

Russians wouldn't have fortifications and minefields that Ukrainians would need to penetrate. Which played a large role in defeating Ukraine's 2023 counteroffensive.

Think a smaller-scale version of the 1943 Third Battle of Kharkov.

UPDATE (Wednesday): Russia seeks to exploit the Ukrainian retreat:

Russian forces are likely attempting to create an operational maneuver force for the exploitation of recent Russian advances in the Avdiivka direction.

Who exploits this? Russia's reserves or Ukraine's theoretical counter-attack that rests on an anvil of Ukrainian forces that stop getting pushed back and hold their ground? Has Ukraine prepared a fortifications line west of where they are being pushed back now?

UPDATE (Thursday): That's the claim:

Ukrainian officials continue to report that Ukrainian forces have stabilized a defensive line immediately west of Avdiivka. Lykhoviy stated on February 28 that Ukrainian forces have decided to establish a defensive line along the Tonenke-Orlivka-Berdychi line where terrain and several reservoirs are favorable for defensive operations.

We'll see whether the Russians or Ukrainians can pay the price to determine the claim's validity.

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: ISW updates continue here. Also, I put war-related links and commentary in the Weekend Data Dump. 

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Weekend Data Dump

Hmmm: Per Reuters, "Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force commander Esmail Ghaani directed Iranian-backed Iraqi groups to 'pause' attacks on US forces during a January 29 meeting in Baghdad." Our strikes were that intense? Or does Iran know Biden is wrapping gifts?

Ef around. Find out. How many businesses or rich people will want to risk the state apparatus being turned against them for hate or envy? Will red states retaliate? Surely a state judge will reverse this "Kafkaesque" orgasmic case for Democrats without US Supreme Court intervention, right? Via Instapundit.

What could possibly go wrong? In more simpler times this would be the evil plan of a Bond villain that 007 must stop. 

Thanks, Russia! "A Moscow-trained missile scientist led the push for China’s [one-child] policy, based on tables of calculations that applied mathematical models used to calculate rocket trajectories to population growth." Oops. I guess that's why Chinese long-range planning failed (with bonus one-child reference). 

Morons. Ignorant, vindictive, morons. Idiocracy has arrived. Via Instapundit.

An old science fiction book of mine used technology that did this. Tip to Instapundit.

For now, stopping subliminal assault is enough: "The Estonian fence is not meant to protect Estonia from a Russian attack, but to aid Estonia in controlling its border with Russia. A growing number of people cross the border illegally as smugglers, illegal migrants, or Russian agents up to no good inside Estonia."

They leave rather than be conscripted: "The invasion of Ukraine led to unexpectedly large Russian casualties. Russia had to conscript more medical personnel to provide their troops with adequate ... care." Also: "40 percent of Russian casualties die compared to only 20 percent of Ukrainian casualties[.]"

Also, we had a 6:1 wounded-to-killed ratio in Vietnam? I'd long heard it was 3:1, more on par with World War II and Korea. And the 7.3:1 ratio in the Iraq War is lower than I thought. Hmmm. 

It is unclear from the wording to me if it was destroyed at sea or ashore: "Saturday's incident marked the first observed Houthi use of an unmanned underwater vessel since attacks in the Red Sea region started in October, CENTCOM said." We'll see what works there in the Persian Gulf.

Can Europe defend itself without America? In theory. If that was "Europe's" highest priority. It is not. But is that even wise?

How Ukraine's sea drones have put Russia on its heels. Unmentioned: How the drones identify and reach targets before the dramatic video-recorded attack runs. That last part is expensive and lacks sparkly newness.

Hmmm: "Iran’s dream is to force the US to retreat to the Egypt-Cyprus line and isolate Israel. But not to destroy it – Israel is the perfect enemy, useful to legitimise the 'axis of resistance', the lintel of Iran’s sphere of influence between Western Afghanistan and the Levant[.]" Iran wants to strike--not kill--a king?

Yes: "Delays in Western security assistance to Ukraine are likely helping Russia launch opportunistic offensive operations along several sectors of the frontline in order to place pressure on Ukrainian forces along multiple axes." Why is Biden demanding an open southern border to screw Ukraine? Am I right?

She should state right now she isn't suicidal or suffering from vertigo: "Yulia Navalnaya, the wife of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, said she would carry on her dead husband’s fight against President Vladimir Putin."

Interesting: Jussie Smollett with a news rather than noose angle? Beats me. It is all very odd.

Assuming "hillbillies" were marrying their cousins was a bigoted explanation for birth defects--and completely wrong. Bigotry so easily dons the disguise of  "science".

Islamic separatism lingers on there: "Philippine troops clashed with Muslim militants in a gunbattle that left at least six soldiers and two rebels dead in a fog-shrouded hinterland in the south, military officials said Monday."

To cooperate or spy on each other? "Turkey and Greece will join the European Sky Shield Initiative, bringing the total number of countries participating in the German-led initiative to 21."

It's their own woke fault and they want military power to pacify it? No: "Officials have asked Gov. Maura Healey to send in the Massachusetts National Guard to stop violence and address security concerns at a troubled high school in a city south of Boston, some school committee members said Monday.

A dozen Singapore F-15s will have a safer home and space to train on Guam. No doubt, American planes will have a forward home in case of war in the South China Sea. 

Hmmm: "Navy SEALs operating in the eastern Mediterranean said that drills carried out off the coast of Cyprus were a signal to adversaries that attacks in the eastern Mediterranean will be opposed with plenty of force." A warning to Hezbollah? To the Houthi? Or to Hamas still holding Americans hostage?

The price of fighting NATO, Nazis, and Satan: "Military operations in Ukraine have cost Russia up to $211 billion and the country has lost $10 billion in canceled or paused arms sales." That arms sales are listed as a separate cost implies that the Pentagon didn't count every imaginable secondary or tertiary cost.

After 9/11 Democrats told America not to become like our jihadi enemies in our rage over the terror attacks that day. America did not become brutal. I believe today's Democrats have become the enemy they have become obsessed with destroying. But without the humor. No jokes in the Woke Jihad, eh?

Blast from the past. 

There is media talk about an "extinction-level" event for the news media. And now for something completely different:


 

Or get us drunk: "The U.S. Navy and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency are developing and testing systems that can identify decoys accompanying an incoming ballistic missile, then ignore the decoys and just destroy the missile. Decoys used by ballistic missile warheads are also called penetration aids." Sorry ...

It's a "slight" increase. Still, glad I had the Johnson & Johnson version. Didn't think my kids needed vaccine. They had grandparent worries. So there's that. I think most "pandemic" harm was by government lockdowns. And borrowing under Trump to cope with government policy and then needlessly by Biden.

Will increasing the usual deployment of carriers in the Pacific to 5 provide 5th generation air superiority over China? Big decks? Seriously? With the need to refit and overhaul them, we can't deploy many routinely. Would it work? And if it works, how long before China's land bases let them pass that surge by?

Oh? "Behold Ursula von der Leyen’s transformation from green dove to military hawk." She undermined NATO as Germany's defense minister. Now she undermines NATO--which defends Europe--to build an EU empire via a "European" military. What transformed? Don't trust throne sniffers and their plan.

Yeah, I'm tired of the drama of Trump--stoked by insane Democrats--so wish Republicans would move on from him. But if he is the alternative to any candidate the woke Democrats put up, I'll vote for Trump. We only get two choices and he's the only real choice. I reject end times rhetoric. But trends matter, too.

Any agreement with Maduro for "democracy"--like "peace" with Putin--is just a chance to get past the current crisis, reload, and resume whatever nefarious objective is pursued. No sanctions will follow. Biden will simply offer more for a "better" deal--this time for sure!

Nobody should unleash the puppies of war: "The Houthi movement launched an anti-ship ballistic missile that struck and disabled the UK-owned, Belize-flagged Rubymar cargo ship in the Bab al Mandeb strait on February 18." Smash them. Sink any Iranian vessel in the area. Give them fear. Moderation in war is folly.

Krugman's position on immigration's effect on the economy has evolved. The problem is that experts start with a narrow expertise and then assume they can pronounce on everything. As they have fun with their broader portfolio, they ignore what they once knew in their narrow areas of expertise. And so, worthless.

Were "hundreds" of Ukrainians captured in a "chaotic" retreat from Avdiivka? I've read Russia has ramped up allegations of this without any videos that one would expect. By its nature, retreating while in contact is very hard. If chaotic, Russia's failure to exploit it and pursue damns them more. I'll reserve judgment.

Another reminder that model output is not actually real world data. They may be useful to justify further inquiry--but not for directly affecting policy.

Oh? "I think there's one line of analysis, which is more of a German line of analysis, which says: We shouldn't win because the Russians will be upset." Ah, the "Let the Wookie win" strategy. Which is odd for Germans--whose 20th century history belies that line of analysis--to believe.

Following recent heightened tensions, China's coast guard intercepted and "inspected" a Taiwanese civilian vessel near China. The reaction? "Kuan Bi-ling, head of Taiwan’s Ocean Affairs Council, said Tuesday the incident triggered 'panic' among the Taiwanese public." That bolsters my worry.

I thought those were the foundations of Smart Diplomacy®: "The United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution proposed by Algeria on Tuesday that called on Israel to implement a cease-fire against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, criticizing the measure as 'wishful' and 'irresponsible.'"

Because we're sending messages rather than missiles: "Despite a month of U.S.-led airstrikes, Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels remain capable of launching significant attacks[.]" Stop that.

"Sue and settle" collusion between the federal government and progressive allies is back. The Obama administration did this. It's easier than changing laws in the legislative process. What a shock the Biden administration is doing it. Rule of law was nice while we had it. 

The Democratic Party is now the party of "1%" wealthy progressives happy in their bubble. Once blue collar, the party now thinks the peasants are revolting and need to shut up. Two areas I used to respect Democrats for are gone. Do read it all.

When law becomes a "nice business you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it" scheme, the only shock is the speed: "Prominent investors have signaled their intent to halt their business in New York following the $355 million verdict in former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud case."

Seeking the future: "The Navy has built a concept for specialized teams delivering non-kinetic effects in the fleet, and there’s a plan to develop more within the next two years." I'm really not against this ... but shiny new things can lead us to undervaluing kinetics.

European obsession with climate change is creating a financial Holodomar for their farmers. The farmers are noticing. 

Soft power: "Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr in a letter to an unnamed US senator on Feb. 9 said that China has offered to 'fill every hotel room,' in Palau, 'and more if more are built' if the small island nation were to break ties with Taiwan."

Gosh! Why are so many Americans shedding few tears for the pending demise of  news media organizations?

Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Morons. Vindictive, narrow-minded morons. I hope New Yorkers remember how this "bad luck" started when the scalp of Trump they're waving about isn't so fresh. Watch the video. Via Instapundit. 

As that extinction level media event approaches, ponder that it is occurring because the media threw their woke, strident opinions at us 24/7. If the left wants to defeat "deplorable" ideas, they should rethink their strategy of burning books. Or maybe deep down the left knows those views are popular. Rot in Hell.

Ukrainian pilots think F-16s are better than Mig-29s: "NATO offered to supply over 60 F-16 jet fighters and these are supposed to arrive in Ukraine by late 2024." This is taking way too long.

Naval drones are revolutionary after two years? "So far there have been twelve [Ukrainian] attacks which resulted in damage to 12 ships and the sinking of a cruiser, two small landing ships and one missile corvette."  I don't know. Not exactly the Marianas Turkey Shoot or Pearl Harbor.

I've been exhausted being unjustifiably called deplorable by progressives. Are progressives finally getting exhausted screeching that accusation? Every tantrum finally ends.

Nobody in the January 6 riot used--or even carried, as far as I can tell--a firearm. But: "Lawmakers should pass gun restrictions in order to prevent an 'insurrection,' an academic paper argues." Tip to Instapundit.

The Minsk agreements weren't a lost opportunity for peace between Russia and Ukraine. They were an opportunity for Putin to reload. The lesson is not to trust the Russians.

So we're assuming free Ukraine has a long run? "The Defense Department transferred Patriot air defense systems and various combat vehicles to Ukraine without a plan to sustain them long-term, which could lead to problems down the road, according to a report by the Pentagon’s watchdog." Try winning first.

See what can fly over your subliminal offensive: "A U.S. Air Force B-52 bomber flew alongside three Philippine FA-50 fighters during a patrol over the South China Sea in the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) on Feb. 19."

Turkey's plane that it aims to be a 5th generation fighter had a test flight. Did Turkey really learn enough from its planned role in building F-35s? 

Apparently to counter Ethiopia's move, news that "Somalia announced on Wednesday a defense deal with Turkey that includes support for the Horn of Africa nation’s sea assets[.]" Let's not forget Erdogan's imperial dreams.

Estimated Russian combat losses in the last two years. And how Russia got here.

This seems like a completely pointless comparison.

A book promoting the asymmetric "Overall Defense Concept" for Taiwan. I have problems with the concept. It takes proven combined arms and joint warfare ideas but gives them a new label that risks disaster, IMO. Its major flaw, as I explored in Military Review, is nobody drives the PLA into the sea.

I sure hope the good guys are helped as much as the enemy is helped by AI.

Why is Biden committed to ignoring laws to do this? "The Biden administration has secretly been slashing the number of illegal immigrants who must post bond to enter the United States in a policy of 'releasing everyone,' according to a former top Department of Homeland Security official." Via Instapundit.

Chest-beating and flinging flying nuclear poo: "Russia's President Vladimir Putin on Thursday took a co-pilot's seat in a nuclear-capable strategic bomber on a flight that appeared aimed at bolstering his image ahead of next month's election he's all but certain to win." Big talk.

FFS: "Why the captain of a US Navy aircraft carrier fighting in the Red Sea is always posting about things like Taco Tuesday and cookies[.]" Because he spends too little time sending missiles to destroy Houthi anti-ship capabilities he has time to send messages.

We send too many messages and not enough missiles: "A ship was attacked and caught fire Thursday in the Gulf of Aden near Yemen, according to a statement from the British Royal Navy's United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations." We need to be relentless--not reactive or even preemptive.

Hmmm: "A trove of leaked Chinese hacking documents might have given the world a glimpse of how widespread and effective China's hacking operations could be." I assumed China would threaten this to deter American intervention over Taiwan. But is this real or an easy way to send the threat?

Democracy dies in darkness, I'm told. Tip to Instapundit.

Is Britain being colonized by people they invited in to settle? Just wondering because I'm told that's really, really bad. Again, Instapundit.

The first American spacecraft to land on the Moon in 50 years. As a young boy, I saw us reach the Moon and thought the year 2000 would be magnificent, space-wise. Oh well. Via Instapundit.

Huh: "Though their geographical contexts and methods differ, Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, expressed a desire to recover lost territory or international prestige[.]" Ukraine, Taiwan, and the South China Sea are mentioned. Say, guess what other lost territory does China gaze at?

Oh please, buying votes with our money is already defined by government employee unions. "Canceling" student loans of the top income brackets is just another version. Tip to Instapundit.

Chinese companies are establishing private militias (as they had in Mao's reign): "The private units are known as the People’s Armed Forces (PAF). They are made up of civilians who continue their regular jobs and act as a reserve force to China’s military[.]" Hmmm. Is this part of or different than the PAP?

In 1916, we "were waiting for an external factor to tip the balance one way or the other. In April 1917, the United States entered the war." America in 2024 is a parallel for Ukraine? The Russian revolution had the role in 1916. It failed to help Germany. I looked at World War I efforts to end a stalemate.

To be fair, it's natural for Putin to cause his political enemies to die.

Oddly anti-Russian Democrats who looove Iran too are in a difficult position: "[NSC] spokesman John Kirby said Thursday that the U.S. will be 'imposing additional sanctions on Iran in the coming days' for its efforts to supply Russia with drones and other technology for the war against Ukraine."

This is taking way too long. More planes. Fewer statements. We had an alternative faster way to show our "unwavering support." Even before the stalemate on renewed security assistance, we've lacked a sense of urgency.

Russia threatens France: "Russian forces threatened to shoot down a French surveillance aircraft patrolling in international airspace over the Black Sea[.]" Those surveillance aircraft do more than patrol.

Behind the Potemkin facade: "As Russian arms makers fulfill government orders at a record rate, they are bracing for a shortage in skilled labor and high-tech manufacturing components that belie the image of a defense-industrial juggernaut, according to analysts." You can prioritize scarce resources--for a while.

The Philippines is talking to Sweden about getting long-wanted fighter planes. 

Guam will be busy in a war with China so practicing how to use air power there is sadly useful: "More than 2,400 personnel from the U.S., Australia, Canada, France, Japan and South Korea took part [in Cope North 24]."

Sure, Trump didn't "rebuild" America's military. He filled in the growing hollowness: "Of the new money in Mr. Trump’s fiscal 2019 budget request for the Pentagon, nearly 90% flowed to personnel, operations and maintenance accounts." You shouldn't expand a hollow force into a bigger hollow force.

Huh: "After nearly a decade of effort the U.S. Air Force has finally developed a MagNav (Magnetic Navigation) system that works reliably enough to supplement or replace GPS for navigation." But not even close to being miniaturized yet.

Hmmm: "Ukrainians not only received weapons from NATO countries, but they also have since 2014 learned much about current NATO, especially American tactics." Has the dead weight of Soviet tactics really been dropped by Ukraine?

Yeah, Democrats say every Republican--back to 1944, I believe--is Hitler or Hitler-like. Democrats are just trying to bounce the rubble with Trump. And people are noticing that Democrats are destroying the village "our democracy" in order to save it.

But this time for sure! "Much of this kind of talk about a 'European defence' gives a sense of déjà vu: the EU also used past crisis points like Brexit or the first Trump presidency to push for greater integration in the security field[.]" I've mentioned that history. Really, killing NATO is an EU wet dream.

Yes, clashes on the Israel-Lebanon border continue--territory the UN said Hezbollah shouldn't be in. But more than four months after October 7th, Hezbollah still hasn't jumped in to rescue Hamas. 

Is Brexit fever spreading? Europeans who produce resent the red tape that strangles them: "the EU is a master at creating underhand non-tariff barriers designed to drive importers away by making their lives a bureaucratic nightmare."  Putin weeps with envy. Although he could be using EU tactics with Belarus.

I did say Iraq's demand for the U.S. to leave weren't real: "reports emerged that al-Sudani’s advisors had quickly backtracked, communicating to American officials that the declaration was only 'an attempt to satisfy domestic political audiences' and that no deadline had been set for this 'quick' withdrawal."

And yes, "The Road to Deterring Iran Goes Through Iraq". Fighting Iran in Iraq is critical, as I've long argued.

Interesting: "By now the research is so abundant even most liberals accept it. Children with strong fathers in their lives are far less likely to wind up in prison, divorced, or with emotional problems. They are also less likely to join radical political organizations." No guarantee, of course. Tip to Instapundit.

How the FBI lost trust in a "credible" confidential human source. Spoiler Alert: Hear information that hurts Democrats. Via  Instapundit.

Defining a break in relations: "significant US forces and assets are eventually withdrawn from the European theatre, and America’s commitment to NATO and Article 5 becomes unreliable politically[.]" The former happened. And few European NATO states sent maneuver units to fight in Afghanistan.

Solar flares may have caused some cell phone service interruptions last week. Did not notice. Tip to Instapundit.

My 2016 advice to Israel if they choose military power to address the Hezbollah threat still applies today. I don't know if it is wise to embark on a new front when just winning in Gaza in the face of international hatred for Jews is rampant. Although maybe that argues for action. Hard to say.

AI IFF?

Keeping aircraft and ships in the fight. 

The Abrams dips its toe into the Winter War of 2022. They should put a "cope cage" on it to make it less obviously different than other tanks at a glance.

I had stopped following this blog as the author got busy with other projects, but I kept the tab open. He looks at Winter War of  2022 casualties. The estimates are propaganda or WAGs. But even the lower estimates make our 7,000 KIA in ten times as long in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a walk in the park.

Democrats keen to erase [Republican] election results denial are shifting to denying Republicans the result of an election. Via Instapundit.

Sure, we don't owe Ukraine aid to fight Russia. But I think it is in our interest to do so. Also, we aren't deciding if Ukrainians die for their country. "I really get sick of people who describe every foreign action as a reaction to an American action or lack of action, as if only America has the agency to make choices."

Putin beats his chest and flings poo. We speak softly and carry a big stick: "A pair of B-1 Lancers flew from Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., to Luleå-Kallax Air Base, Sweden, to start a Bomber Task Force deployment on Feb. 23[.]" Russia will notice that.

Quantity's quality: "The American military plans to rapidly deploy myriads of small cheap satellites, similar to Space X’s ... Starlink system, to deal with the possibility of Russia and China detonating nuclear EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) weapons in orbit to destroy essential satellite networks."Also, Starshield.

Does Russia think this would help them defeat Ukraine? "The Kremlin has been setting conditions to conduct hybrid warfare operations in the Baltic States and Finland for months and is currently engaged in such operations against Moldova." What about Germany? The effort could backfire, of course.

Huh. I did not know Italian and German immigrants faced internment early in World War II, in addition to the Japanese. That would interfere with the accusation it was purely racist with no basis (if exaggerated) in national security. I often wondered why Italians and Germans didn't face the same scrutiny. They did.

Yeah: "Putin’s aims remain the destruction of NATO as an effective alliance, the breaking of the tie between the United States and Europe, and the construction of a new global order in which Russia’s voice and power are dominant." The EU's drive for "strategic autonomy" fits well with Putin's aim.

Don't answer them. Relentlessly hunt and kill them: "The U.S. and Britain struck 18 Houthi targets in Yemen on Saturday, answering a recent surge in attacks by the Iran-backed militia group on ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden" Still, thanks Britain.

I've been collecting H. Beam Piper books for quite some time and check used book stores hoping to score one I don't have. I just bought the entire Kindle collection for 99 cents.

Long before I coined the "let the Wookie win" strategy that some advocate for foreign enemies, I recognized the approach. As I've said, ineffective use of force is counter-productive.

And yes, my resolve to edit down these entries to no more than three lines on my computer in the drafting screen is working out nicely. Which translates into text going into the fifth line at maximum on the published screen.

Achieving Space Surprise?

How do you hide your ambitions for space infantry? Hide it in a proposal so ludicrous and expensive that you can't imagine the Pentagon not carrying out the distraction mission.

The idea that we'd use a spaceship to move a small amount of supplies or troops around the planet in the blink of the eye seems ludicrous (via Instapundit):

"Rocket cargo point-to-point is not the reason we're building Starship," said SpaceX senior adviser Gary Henry. "We're building Starship to get to Mars." [But] "what we're finding is it's a system we're putting together that has profound impacts for national security, and one of them just happens to be rocket point-to-point."

The big driver of that is the potential the military could use the rocket to send supplies, and perhaps even troops in the future, to anywhere in the world in less than an hour. Defense department officials began looking at the idea two decades ago but only recently has it come closer to reality.

That is a "jumping the shark" moment for wasting defense dollars. It makes me cringe that we'd put money into that science fair project idea rather than into air and sea mobility assets to project and sustain real--not token--military power across wide oceans.

Unless the stated purpose for the ridiculous capability is a ruse for the real purpose:

I find the idea as stated ridiculous.

Still, aiming high is something we need to do to dominate space, the new high ground.

So given that the idea that we'd land a squad of highly trained troopers on the ground via space travel is asinine, does this idea have merit?

If the conference is just a ruse to cover the real purpose, yes. What if the plan isn't to land troops on Earth by 2030, but to gain the ability to reach into space and capture real estate rather than just destroy objects in Earth orbit? A squad of Marines would be a drop in the bucket on Earth, but in space in 20 years, 13 Marines would be a decisive ground force capable of entering and capturing anything any nation would put into orbit in this time frame.

In which case I say start (secretly) working on the SMOD unit patches now!

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

The Dyle Plan 2.0 Forms in Plain Sight

I don't blame the Baltic NATO states for not wanting to be on the wrong side of a stalemated front between Russian invaders and NATO allies. But we've seen this play out before and it ends in disaster for the free West. NATO must not make the perfect the enemy of the good, and rush into a kill sack.

These NATO allies are rightly afraid of Russian threats:

The Baltics have been pushing for the NATO tripwire battalion battlegroups in the region to be expanded to combat-ready brigades in each country and for NATO to commit to a permanent presence, and a division ready to deploy to each country to help them defend against an invasion from day one. But the development of regional military plans has been slow and Baltic anxieties climaxed earlier this year when Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas caused a stir by criticizing the alliance’s defense plans. These plans, she said, would “allow [the Baltic states] to be overrun before liberating them after 180 days,” leading to a “complete destruction” of the small coastal countries.

But fear is not always the beginning of wisdom. Do you really think 180 days to liberate the Baltic states is unreasonable given the geography? There is great danger in rushing inadequate forces to hold the Baltic states:

I've argued that it is foolish to try to stop Russia from taking the NATO Baltic states and that a better bet is to plan for a counter-offensive--following the conquest of Kaliningrad* to secure the flank, secure unimpeded access for Poland-bound reinforcements, and as a bargaining chip--to liberate the Russian-occupied territory.

Basically I think that NATO can't really put enough ground combat power in the Baltic states to stop Russia; and if NATO could it would both be seen as a threat to St. Petersburg, prompting even more Russian power threatening NATO there, and be an opportunity to simply attack through Belarus to link up with Russia's Kaliningrad and cut off the best NATO combat units in a Baltic pocket to be reduced at will.

The only way is to counter-attack, destroy the Russian army holding the Baltic states, and thus allow the war to be ended without a Russian threat to destroy NATO units in the Baltic states. Hopefully the status quo ante is restored and no nukes fly.

I understand why the NATO Baltic states are building fortifications on their borders with Russia: 

A collection of 600 bunkers are to be built across the borders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to shore up NATO’s eastern flank and deliver a groundbreaking anti-mobility defensive line aimed at preventing any "quick and far-reaching offensive" launched by Russia.

The Baltic NATO states are horrified that NATO doesn't plan to liberate them until 180 days after the Russians invade. The Baltic states should definitely build that defensive line. But acting as if that's the NATO main line of resistance rather than a means to buy time with an "anti-mobility defensive line" for NATO to mobilize and move to the east--and to inflict disproportionate casualties on the invaders to get past the line--is a grave mistake.

The French and their British allies rushed into Belgium to fight the Germans well away from northern France. In World War I the German initial thrust carried through Belgium and put the war into northern, industrialized France with a lot of people and natural resources lost for the duration of the war. The lost capabilities and damage inflicted on French soil for four years was something France did not want to repeat. Thus, the Dyle Plan.

But the Germans didn't repeat the Schlieffen Plan with the addition of tanks and Stukas. The Germans ended up going with the Manstein Plan that let the best Allied armies walk into a kill sack, which cheaply took them out of the war.

On the bright side, in 1940 the Allies did indeed spare France four years of warfare inside France. But complete collapse in weeks surely wasn't what they had in mind instead.

Is that what NATO should replicate now? Losing NATO's best troops in an effort to help Baltic states avoid 180 days of the treatment occupied Ukrainians still endure may mean Russia will hold the territory long enough to dig in and plant minefields.

Which means Baltic State civilians will endure Russian brutality for a lot longer than 180 days.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

From China Dream to Nightmare in Two Years

China got old before it got rich. And it showed its aggressiveness before it stopped relying on foreign customers.

China is having serious economic problems and internal unrest. Is China heading for a civil war--a not uncommon feature of their huge country--to decide the direction of the country? 

China was a much more important country [before Russia invaded Ukraine]. What has happened over the past two years has been the dysfunction of the Chinese economy to a point that it cannot support many other things. For example, the naval capability that it has, okay, it's quite expensive to maintain. They're not doing that. So at this point, they have a situation where they've arrived at the place that the United States did after the Civil War. After the Civil War, we started being an exporting power, and we did very well—50% of the world's exports came from the US until World War I broke out and nobody could buy any, and we went into the Great Depression.

So when you have an exporting power, you're looking at an accident that will happen. They're dependent on the internal capability of their customers. ... And this is why we forecast a while ago that China can't sustain its growth because you cannot sustain reliably an economy based primarily on exports unless you own the countries you're exporting to. And they don't. And the United States had the Great Depression and what we're having now is a greater depression in China. ... 

Now, it's very hard to say that there's going to be civil war, but on the other hand, when you sit down and exclude everything else that's possible, you see this as they're going to have to fight with each other to settle this and they're going to try to hold together as long as possible. But the problem that I saw was that at the beginning, China was an illusion. China had its ability, but there was no infrastructure beneath it, no financial system that was coherent underneath it. And while it showed enormous growth, a lot of that was fake. Not in the sense that it didn't happen, but in the sense that it was based on a hill of sand. 

Do read it all. He covers a lot about Russia and China. I absolutely respect his analysis whether or not I agree with him.

And he says foreign wars could lead to bigger problems for China. Although I'll counter that if keeping the Chinese Communist Power in charge of China is indeed the highest priority of the CCP, even a losing war might be a victory in that narrow sense:

If large-scale unrest--common enough in China--takes place and appears to threaten party control--could China initiate a war abroad believing nationalism will smother the internal fissures?

China could easily believe a quick sharp blow against our forces will discourage us from continuing the fight, and the national joy of defeating America would end domestic unrest at little cost to China.

We like to think that it makes no sense for China to risk their economic growth by going to war. We assume--perhaps rightly--that we'd beat China.

But if the Chinese Communist Party is willing to accept even defeat as the price for defending Chinese Communist Party control of China, they have an entirely different view of what is rational than we do.

China showed its true face of aggressive ambition before it could escape the trap of needing potential victims as customers. I speculated even before Putin invaded Ukraine that making Putin's Russia the target of a war might dilute Western hostility. As I observed a little later:

China used to try to keep a low profile during its rise in power. Now it goes out of its way to openly push America and anybody else who resists China's rise. Does China think it is more powerful than it is?

China made a rookie mistake.

Even that might not work out for the CCP, of course. Let's not pretend that the Chinese have near-mystical planning abilities, eh? Because I also say in a country with the size and complexity of a continent, all outcomes are possible at once. 

Have a super sparkly day.

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.