The Most Important Country Nobody's Heard Of?

Will Belarus choose the West? Who knows? If the country does choose the West, will Russia choose to reverse that choice?

That's interesting given the balancing act Lukashenko has conducted between Russia and the West:

The democratic world just celebrated the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. How far east was it considered a historic victory and how much longer will it take for its shadow to disappear in Belarus? Opening doors to token opposition representation in parliament, more frequent overtures to the West, and the promotion of national symbols may seem like the early spring of Belarusian rebirth after more than 25 years of Alyaksandr Lukashenka’s dictatorship. But are these signs of a thaw and a repetition of the events of 1989?

It may just be Belarus maneuvering for a better financial deal with Russia:

Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko on Sunday threatened to pull out of signing an integration deal with Russia next month if Moscow failed to resolve their dispute over energy subsidies.

Russia has propped up its traditional ally with loans and subsidies to keep Belarus in its political orbit but now plans to phase these out to lessen the burden on its economy.

Given that the government kept the only two opposition members out of their parliament, I imagine we can rule out Lukashenko turning to the West.

But we should very much enable Belarus to resist turning to Russia. We should be very interested in the fate of what may be the most important territory in modern Europe.

My view is that Putin's National Guard would be the natural force to invade and pacify Belarus if it tries to choose the West.

And Putin could have a more personal goal for taking control of Belarus.

Russian control of Belarus puts Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine in a tough position.

Battles for Iran

Lingering unhappiness with Iran's mullah-run government erupted:

Protests over gasoline prices have swept across some 100 cities and towns in Iran, turning violent faster than widespread economic protests in 2017 and rallies over the country’s disputed 2009 presidential election.

The scale of the unrest that began on Friday remains unclear as authorities have shut down the internet across this nation of 80 million people.

Gas prices on top of corruption and now renewed sanctions triggered this rather unexpected explosion of anger.

Iran's government said that riots had been reduced by Monday:

Iran said it still faces "riots" even though the situation was calmer Monday after days of violent protests sparked by a shock decision to hike petrol prices in the sanctions-hit country.

Major roads have been blocked, banks torched and shops looted in the nationwide unrest that has left at least two dead -- a civilian and a policeman.

Footage of the violence showing masked young men on debris-strewn streets s
setting buildings ablaze has been aired on state television, which rarely shows any signs of dissent.

The government ordered effective rationing of gasoline with tiered price increases. You may recall news that Iran had captured vessels smuggling gasoline out of Iran. With the distortions caused by heavily subsidized gasoline, smugglers had the incentive to take that cheap domestically sold gasoline and sell it abroad--as the first article notes.

The situation is unclear because the government shut down much of the Internet in Iran in response. Organizing without communications apps is more difficult. Or is the Internet just cut off to the outside world?

We shall see if the government unleashes their goons:

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made a point to refer to “thugs” in comments he made Sunday to try to calm the public.

Iranian authorities have had much experience in dealing with public unrest, whether in student protests that swept Iran in 1999, the Green Movement demonstrations that followed widespread allegations of vote rigging in Iran’s 2009 presidential election or the economic protests that began at the end of 2017.

The battle against Iran is being fought inside Iraq, as I've noted and have advocated we fight ever since the Iraq War. And that resistance to Iranian influence is raging:

Anti-government demonstrators in southern Iraq blocked roads leading to the country’s main port on Monday, while the country’s central bank reduced working hours because of ongoing demonstrations, security officials said. ...

Protesters also cut roads to the airport with burning tires in the holy city of Najaf.

This article doesn't mention it, but the protests over corruption and lack of government services in Shia areas so long after the fall of Saddam's minority Sunni regime is outrageous. And the protesters see Iran's hand in Iraq which keeps the corruption rolling to Iran's advantage.

Iran's efforts are extensive:

They say the unprecedented leak of 700 pages of Iranian intelligence cables shows Tehran’s efforts to embed itself in Iraq, including paying Iraqi agents working for the United States to switch sides.

Iran's efforts go back a long time, and were part of Iraq's reasoning for invading revolution-wracked Iran in 1980. Iraq's Shias abused by the Sunni-minority government naturally looked to Shia Iran to help them.

Since the American-led Coalition destroyed the Saddam regime that appeal has been lessened and Arab Iraqi Shias are far more suspicious of Persian Shias. Suspicious enough to riot. And much of the (Most? All?) killing of protesters has been done by Iranian-paid militias.

We--as expressed by a Canadian general--are not happy with the scale of the killings:

The violence surrounding waves of anti-government protests across Iraq has been "an absolute tragedy", NATO's Iraq chief told AFP on Sunday at the close of his year-long mandate.

More than 330 people have died since October 1 in rallies in Baghdad and cities across the south calling for an overhaul of the current government, making them Iraq's deadliest demonstrations in decades.

But we aren't doing much other than condemning the violence. We need to promote rule of law in Iraq, which will help with services and help with legitimacy and help with reducing Iranian influence.

Indeed, I have called for fighting this battle before even the Surge/Awakening. I wanted a post-war surge of experts to clean up corruption in the government, legislature, and judiciary. Until we do that we are fighting Iran there with a grave handicap.

America can battle Iranian influence in Iraq if we remain there and if we continue to squeeze Iranian financial resources. And if we actively promote Iraqi rule of law.

Who knows? Perhaps the Battle for Iran will solve the battles for Iran in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere--and the nuclear problem, of course.

A lot of problems would be easier to solve without mullah-run Iran spreading mayhem and Iranian influence.

Oh! So Close

Why on God's green Earth is the Army willing to give smart rifles to support troops but not to combat troops?

Army infantry officials at Fort Benning, Georgia, are testing a handful of advanced fire control optics in an effort to one day help non-combat arms soldiers shoot more accurately against close-quarter and long-range enemy targets.

The effort is part of the Army Expeditionary Warfighting Experiments (AEWE) 2020 and will involve soldiers live-firing M4A1 carbines with fire control systems from three companies to see whether they can improve a shooter's probability of hitting targets faster than current Army-issue optics.

My view, as I explored in an article on the USNI Blog, is that combat troops should have smart rifles in order to use training time devoted to marksmanship to tactical training:

The U.S. Marine Corps proudly says every Marine is a rifleman. But what happens if even enemy insurgents and militia fighters are just as accurate? New technologies are hastening that day of reckoning. Marines must cope by developing new training priorities, technology, and tactics to maintain their competitive advantage. ...

The pairing of simple bullets with smart sights and automatic firing protocols must change the way Marines prepare for infantry combat. Dumb-but-controlled (DBC) firing employed by even ill-trained forces will revolutionize infantry combat.

Because eventually enemy militias and terrorists--not to mention enemy combat troops--will have smart rifles that will match the skills of our well-trained infantry.

The Return of History

One of the things that most annoys me about the whole Russia collusion/hacking/stealing-the-election nonsense is that Democrats seem to have discovered that this is what Russians (and the Soviets before them) do:

For social media sites like Facebook, 2019 is turning into the year of the history lesson. This is all about the resurgence of Cold War era media campaigns that Russia used to wage internationally using pre-Internet media. In the last few months alone Facebook has announced the discovery and banishment of hundreds of accounts owned and operated by Russian firms that specialize in this sort of thing. The largest Russian disinformation operation is the IRA (Internet Research Agency). During the Cold War something like the IRA would be a top-secret subsidiary of the KGB (secret police).

In the Cold War, those on the left often picked up the Soviet propaganda and amplified it.

In my view, in addition to historical amnesia, Democrats today are simply shocked that the Russians employed propaganda against a Democrat rather than the Republicans who were usually the targets.

Also, don't forget the Chinese, who are a rising (for now) and not a faltering power.

Weekend Data Dump

I guess the communist scum in Bolivia failed in their effort to steal an election. In last week's data dump I wondered what was going on. I honestly don't follow Bolivian politics too closely.

Needless to say, if a federal bureaucracy and judges had thwarted President Obama, there would be no praises of the "democratic" Deep State protecting our Constitution. Bureaucrats can serve or they can resign in protest. Carrying out an independent foreign policy that conflicts with the elected president is not an option. I'll say it again, some people in the civil service need to be fired and have their pensions revoked to rein this in. Tip to Instapundit.

After all the talk of Trump abandoning the Kurds in Syria, the American military presence won't be much less than it was before that so-called withdrawal. We get benefits for remaining in eastern Syria; although there is a risk of escalation by enemies without an increase in our willingness to fight for those benefits. So I do worry about a mismatch between our troop presence and our willingness to fight to keep them there and defend our interests. The issue is complicated and reasonable people can disagree on policy. I just protest the simplistic Orange Man Bad analysis.  But no, the presence of Americans in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf is not an indication of "endless war."

I've long thought that if you compare the full life cycle of electric cars versus internal combustion engine cars that the former wouldn't come out looking very good. So yeah, what about the batteries? Help save the planet, indeed.

Yes, Democrats who control the House of Representatives can set up whatever rules they like for the impeachment-like inquiry regardless of the limited precedents. But it still doesn't look good for respect for rule of law and fairness if it's a Calvinball Impeachment, does it?

So are the Russians positioning themselves in the Libya civil war to aim refugees/migrants at Europe as a weapon? Well, they did the same in Syria, so probably yes.

Thank Goodness, the Brexit Party won't run against Johnson's people in the coming British election and risk splitting the pro-Brexit vote. Labour promised a new Brexit vote. Given that the one more than three years ago was supposed to settle the question, the pledge is clearly one of having votes until Remain wins. Which is standard EU imperial policy, to be fair.

You people seriously believe this?

Peak Stupid's summit grows ever higher. Tip to Instapundit.

That's horrifying. But this sounds more like a problem of overly aggressive county officials rather than the law. I was working for the legislature in 1999 and remember well that the law streamlined Depression-era statutes designed to make it very difficult for the government to foreclose on tax-delinquent property. The change was needed. But the locals really screwed that man who seems to have made a simple math error.

"Gangs" of unknown membership in Malmo have been violent--including a car bomb. Swedish authorities are creating a task force to combat the mysterious problem. Well they should given that it is a totally new thing to have 100 explosions in a year.  The Danes are tightening border controls to avoid spill-over. I'm so old I remember when the problem was mere "youths." Now they're organized. I stand by my prediction at the end of this post. Am I wrong?

What's up with China ordering their students out of Taiwan by Taiwan's January 2020 national election? Normally I'd expect clearing the decks for an invasion as an explanation. But perhaps the Chinese authorities simply don't want their students to get dangerous ideas about Asian democracy in action lest the Chinese students start to think the Hong Kong protesters have a point.

What is ACK!'s major malfunction? ACK approvingly cited Canadian activist Naomi Kline. Which makes sense given that Canada has a prime minister personally trying hard to bridge that white-persons of color gap.

I'm not happy with China making such a major investment in a Greek port. Let's hope Greece stays financially solvent lest China just try to buy the country. Let's hope the EU can manage that problem.

Strategypage looks at the multi-war in Syria--including the al-Baghdadi raid--as well as the persistence of jihadi impulses in Islam that are currently tearing Syria apart. Apparently in the first month of Turkey's operation about 150 civilians have been killed and 850 combatants have been killed. Note that Turkey does not have their full security buffer zone because Kurds and Syrian government forces are resisting. On the jihadi issue, my view is that the only good jihadi is a dead jihadi--but rules of engagement need to be strict enough so that nobody responsible for making good jihadis adopts the view that "a Moslem running away is a jihadi and a Moslem standing still is a well-disciplined jihadi." And note that Assad tried to play the game of aiming jihadis at his enemies--in Iraq--and ultimately that weapon turned against him big time. May Pakistan's short-sighted, India-obsessed military rulers take note.

I find it bizarre to read articles that the White House has "overruled" this or that staffer on foreign policy. The president runs our foreign policy--not staffers. Staffers offer advice and then carry out orders or resign in protest. And while Democrats are praising Colonel Vindman for opposing Trump's Ukraine policy, it isn't up to him. I've long been clear on presidential control of the military. And Vindman isn't the hill for Democrats to die on for this issue, it seems. Vindman has the right--and duty--to resist unlawful orders. Beyond that, neither he nor his colleagues make policy. The president does not "subvert"--as Vindman stated--the policy preferences of staff--the president makes our foreign policy. Do you really think our military wanted to abandon Iraq in 2011 as Obama ordered? But never did I hint that our military should resist or obstruct that decision. The military has a duty to obey even bad decisions, if lawful. Vindman seems more like an infiltrator than a whistleblower. Also, keep in mind that basically Vindman was concerned that if the phone call at the center of this melodrama became public--which his actions may very well have helped happen--the Democrats on Congress would throw Ukraine under the Russian bus in order to protect Biden. Their sudden Russia outrage has limits, I guess.

I was going to complain that San Francisco voters elected Chesa Boudin, a socialist, terrorist-friendly person who worked for the thug Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, to be their district attorney. But as I've said, people have the right to local self rule. So I say San Francisco should fully enjoy the fruits of their judgment--good and hard. I'm cruel, I know, but the voters deserve to live with their choice. Tips to Instapundit.

Now all we need to do is get South Korea to agree that US-Japanese-ROK cooperation against common threats is a good thing. South Korea seems to want a triangular firing squad lately, which surely makes North Korea, China, and Russia smile.

I feel sorry for the obviously troubled Greta Thunberg. I'm mad at the extremists exploiting her for their own goals. I'm horrified that so-called adults treat her every utterance like some Oracle of Delphi (as I commented on in this data dump). And I'm outraged that these activists are trying to terrify our children over their fantasy's of doom. The end of the world is not in fact nigh.

The short answer is that why would Iran want to change the sloppy wet kiss the Obama administration gave Iran with this gift of nuclear weapons?

The San Francisco airport therapy pig is all cute and stuff--right until a Moslem group expresses offense. Then the city district attorney will order the pig arrested, tried, and executed (but not eaten), in that order.

Huh. Ballsy to subvert the Trump administration and beg for money to fund it. If GoFundMe had existed in the 1980s as a means to fund initiatives (perhaps by laundering money), the CIA could have avoided that whole Iran-Contra scandal.

Example 1,348 of why I don't trust the media--with particular disdain for the self-described "fact checkers." Tip to Instapundit.

In what alternate world of idiocy was Australia's decision to buy the F-35 a "problematic purchase?" Yes, Australia needs strike capabilities. And with stealth and precision, Australia gets that. And if what the F-35 can carry without killing stealth is insufficient, Australia can field long range anti-ship missiles from ships, non-stealthy planes, and ground launchers that the F-35 can aim and fire. And if the complaint is that Australia won't also commit funding to protect bases the F-35 will use, that's a whole other kind of problematic and can be addressed by committing sufficient funding to defense. Australia spends a decent amount but is around 2% of GDP. If the threat is rising, spending more than that is not out of line to defend their freedom and democracy, is it?

Israel creates a good jihadi. And don't even bother to tell me that this risks jihadi "retaliation." Gaza jihadis will kill Israeli civilians with or without the pretext of "retaliation."

Hahahaha! Quite accurate.

Another example of #liberalprivilege--control group edition.

She's clearly gone quite mad. Tip to Instapundit.

The Turks are deporting ISIL members to European countries who don't want them back--the countries that condemned America for holding jihadis at Guantanamo Bay.

No! Way! "The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found uranium particles at a site in Iran that had not been declared by the Iranian authorities." One of the basic problems of the Iran nuclear deal was that the IAEA could only inspect facilities that the Iranians let them inspect. The mystery is why Iran let the IAEA into that facility. One assumes somebody on the Iranian side is in deep trouble for clearing the site for inspection.

Libya.

Believe in climate change as though it is a religion?  It's a religion. I even wrote a song of faith for it!

Yes, the impeachment drama is really about policy differences--which should be resolved by elections and not impeachment. I differ a bit on the Russia issue. Yes, Russia is a foe and we need to prepare to fight Russia to deter them. And at the very least the large number of nukes we have justify some reductions in acute tensions. But in the long run we should want to split Russia from China to avoid being distracted by a pointless Russia front when facing a rising China. This probably requires post-Putin leadership. And I wouldn't throw Ukraine under the bus in an effort to achieve it (remember Russia needs America more than we need Russia).

I firmly believe that looking into whether there was corruption in the Biden-Ukraine issue in 2016 is a legitimate question--especially given the precedent provided by the insane Democratic efforts to keep the Trump-Russia 2016 "collusion" alive so long--and not an issue of "digging up dirt." What was going on in Kiev back then? The summer 2019 phone request was too specific to 2016 to be something similar to the Steele dossier that Democrats in and out of the Obama administration flogged.

Yeah, Spain (and the West by association) has no reason to feel guilty about destroying the Aztec empire. Remember that Cortes had plenty of local allies who didn't like being ritually sacrificed in massive numbers.

Piracy off the coast of Nigeria.

The New York Times notes that Ukraine would like some stability in the United States in order to get more support against Russia. Ukraine is trying to negotiate with Russia. The NYT thinks this is a damning indictment of the Trump administration. But in my view the chaos is at this point is almost exclusively the fault of the Democrats with their Ahab-like obsession with impeaching the Bad Orange Man. For the record, I don't think Democrats care about Ukraine one bit. Their sudden concern is suspicious, no? I have long been on board democracy in Ukraine. And I wasn't willing to sacrifice that in order to keep Ukrainian troops in Iraq.

Please God, let "Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct [evidence]" be Peak Stupid for 2019, at least.

Iraqi protesters bravely battle corruption and Iranian influence despite their casualties. This is a long-term problem to solve (with related "what the Hell happened to Max Boot" questions).

That is an excellent question. Perhaps it is related to how Hillary Clinton evaded record-keeping, FOIA, and communications security requirements by setting up a private server to conduct official State Department business on a private email account. Consequences are for the conservative little people.

The idea that Trump cared more about investigating the Biden family for their 2016 activities than he cared about Ukraine seems to be refuted by the facts that the Javelin missiles were sent and that Ukraine did not launch an investigation. I guess mind reading isn't an exact science yet. Also, on that delay in the missile shipment, this makes total sense.

You can't say we didn't give Erdogan a chance to reverse his S-400 purchase decision. I'm relieved Erdogan didn't take his opportunity. We have an Erdogan crisis and not a S-400 crisis. And we've taken steps to keep production going without Turkey. I wonder where the regional maintenance hub will go?

What worries me the most about China's naval power is the industrial capability behind it apparently capable of rapidly building warships. In contrast to our yards that have trouble with new designs, cost overruns, and quality control. Have a super sparkly day. As for their carrier force, which defenders of the American carrier fleet cite as proof that carriers are still the primary asset for sea control, thus far China seems to just want "just a few to intimidate its neighbors." Which fits well with my distinction between useful and burning hulks. (Lord, I've been doing this a long time).

More on the new Japanese submarines I mentioned last week.

Eleven years after bombing Khadaffi's forces until rebels killed the dictator--and then staying out of the country so locals can work out their differences without our "harmful presence" (and what about Russia's less-than-helpful intervention?)--Libya's civil war still rolls along and American forces still have to bomb ISIL there to create more "good jihadis."

China has more concentration camps to "reeducate" Uighers than is thought. It's bad enough with what we thought we knew. Oh, and may the UN rot in Hell for officially commending China's "remarkable achievements in the field of human rights." The UN serves a useful function. That function is not as the conscience of the "sainted international community." I'm sure the Chinese authorities could find room in those camps for quite a few Hong Kong protesters, if need be.

I guess you have to break a few eggs to enjoy your Trump-free omelet. Is strident impeachment fervor the last refuge of a scoundrel?

The Arab Spring largely failed. But the impulse for democracy as an alternative to autocrats or Islamists as rulers lives on. And the people who want that alternative have learned from past failures. This will take a long time and will be a big part of the good guys winning the Islamic Civil War over who defines Islam--murderous jihadis or normal people. But it is important to achieve regardless of how long it takes. One day, Islamists will have little legitimacy in a world where the Arab Spring finally triumphs. Syrians are probably too shell shocked and battered to be a part of this, after their effort in Arab Spring I was crushed by Assad and betrayed by jihadis. But Sudan, Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq may yet score a clear success. Iraq is already much better than it was under Saddam, and is an enemy of jihadis. With some rule of law, Iraq can be a fully functioning democracy. But will Iran try to crush these impulses in Lebanon and Iraq? With Hezbollah, Iran's chances are much greater in Lebanon than in Iraq. At least Iran's finances are stretched taut with American sanctions--see Iran's gas rationing and retail price increase--no doubt intended to prevent smugglers from exporting subsidized gasoline, which that article mentions. We'll see.

I keep worrying about reaching Peak Stupid. But Representative Swalwell is competing in a whole new category of Peak Moron.

Big if true, no doubt. Oddly, a lot of Iran's fans seem to hear one of those "dog whistles" I hear so much about here.

Is it just me or does the Left trot out every big-spending plan and slap "Green" on it, regardless of the subject of the plan? These people are nuts. And worse, they think the rest of us are, too.

Short of being used as a cure for pending blindness, I never trusted this procedure. It always seemed cosmetic in nature. Glasses will be fine, thank you.

Actual bribery.

This is a BS study--claiming 70% of Americans are "struggling financially"--that really requires an examination of the "definitions" section. One, it is a survey rather than being based on actual statistical measures. Two, the study says you are struggling financially if you report one of five different measures of struggling: being middle class and spending more than you earn; having trouble saving money; struggling to pay for groceries or housing; something related to debt, and being stressed by money issues. The article was amazingly vague about those factors. If you fail just one, you are struggling. And again, this is all self-reporting "data" with nothing objective in it. As one problem, let me note that if you save money for your child's college and now you are spending that money, you will most likely be spending more than your income. This just sounds like a political hit piece to convince you that our economy isn't in good shape (well, apart from the national debt and budget deficits--which nobody even pretends to care about these days).

Yes, America needs to know "whether [CIA director] Brennan’s actions and faulty information amounted to incompetence or something considerably worse."

Counter-terrorism up close and personal.

So it is horrifying that the Russians might have a transcript of a particular call between Trump and and our ambassador to the EUwho was in Ukraine because it was made on an unsecured phone? Maybe. But one, having an ambassador to the EU is annoying. But I digress. Two, we have no idea if we wanted the Russians to hear that conversation. And more to the point, so it is bad to communicate on unsecured communications systems? Okay. Now do Hillary Clinton and here private server that bypassed government security equipment and procedures for her entire tenure as secretary of state.

I remain unsure of the Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) concept. If it is really just ultra-"purple" combined arms across all domains, that's good. I worry that it will mean abandoning the idea that each service has a core competency for its own primary domain and that each service will instead dissipate its command of its core competency by expanding capabilities into all domains. The synergy of different services commanding their own domain was the point of this Land Warfare Paper that I wrote about the World War II Guadalcanal campaign.

Is Russia thinking about a base in northeast Syria at Qamishli? For God's sake, why would they want to do that? The Russians deny that intent, for what that's worth.

While I will vote for Trump in 2020 against the Democrats' unhinged 24/7 Resistance, I don't agree with defining being conservative as being aligned with Trump. As I've said many times, Trump started as a liberal Democrat and if the Democrats weren't borderline insane, he'd be free to go that way in policy (my prime example is his support for a massive spending program on infrastructure, which I absolutely oppose as a left-wing spending bonanza--see the 2009 "stimulus" spend-a-palooza). In many ways Democrats have actually created the Trump who does conservative things that are worth supporting. My support for Trump is tactical and not strategic.

Before the Michigan-MSU game on Saturday:

When you know the habits of your foe, this is how a flak trap is set.

Iranians aren't happy at all with gasoline price increases. Greta Thunberg is no doubt annoyed at their lack of commitment to Green energy. But with the mullah rulers shutting down the Internet in response to the protests, I guess the Oracle of Stockholm won't be able to communicate her ire.

Let's examine the degree of difficulty America has faced waging the war on Islamist terrorism: America was condemned as monstrous for holding hundreds of actual Islamic terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. China has imprisoned at least a million for the crime of being Moslem and perhaps prone to terrorist inclinations.

PLA troops were used in Hong Kong to clean up streets after clashes. They are being used as labor and are in civilian clothes. But consider this a recon mission for the troops and consider it a way to ease the acceptance of PLA troops in the streets in uniform eventually.

The Russians continue to have problems with their sea-based nuclear deterrent. Fracking, aggression, and corruption are taking their toll. Seriously, do the Russians even have many working long-range nuclear weapons?

A reminder that the so-called lack of advanced planning for the withdrawal of American troops from northeast Syria was not Trump's fault. The military had advance warning going back nearly a year but did nothing to carry out that order--until the recent order to just do it. With no ambiguity to exploit, the military saluted and carried out its orders--as it does (and should). You may recall me writing about it. This has been building for a while. And we still haven't left Syria.

Our military exercises in South Korea are important to maintaining combat skills. I'm not comfortable delaying more to induce North Korea to negotiate seriously. I concede I don't know what else is happening quietly. Maybe economic and financial sanctions really are squeezing North Korea hard enough to justify suspending military training. Maybe we are closer to getting real talks than is apparent. But maybe we are going to accept a nuclear North Korea. Have a super sparkly day.

A kind of battle seems to be raging at a Hong Kong university campus.

Why do I get the feeling that Obama's recent warning to Democrats isn't so much about getting rid of the "crazy stuff" but rather is a warning not to let the voters "see" the crazy stuff. Tip to Instapundit.

So doesn't the result of the quantum physics experiment call into question the validity or even the very existence of the experiment? Tip to Instapundit.

Not so fast, those racists and sexists aren't merely "Americans," they're Democrats. This is the primary season, remember.

Ooooh. Burn!

"Elections Have Consequences" As Guideline Rather than Rule

With the increasing evidence that the permanent bureaucracy has a lot of people who think they should make American foreign policy, McCarthy writes:

There is a lot of that thinking going around in the policy community, such that my aversion to scandalizing it as the 'deep state' is getting harder to justify.

My take is that three years ago it was a bit overwrought to talk about a "deep state." We had the banal issue of a bureaucracy defending its turf through the usual ability to exploit inertia against undesired (by them) change. At some level I used that reality and other factors to try to reassure Democrats that their turn-it-to-11 panic was really unjustified.

Although despite my worries about the partisanship of the bureaucracy I didn't expect the shameful extent and duration that has rejected the once-deeply held notion that who won has consequences. The injection of politics from the Democrats in the bureaucracy has since then begun to create a Deep State as the partisans married the power of the bureaucracies to their partisan politics. The Deep State became self aware, so to speak, sometime in the last three years.

And by February I was already getting alarmed at that development:

The federal bureaucracy won't let a little thing like an election tell them what to do. Liberalism today . . . liberalism tomorrow . . . liberalism forever. Trump, perhaps with the help of Congress, needs a vertical chop of entire uncooperative sections of some departments that avoids civil service protections by eliminating the funding for an entire entity. Eliminating the position is different than firing someone, right? A Roman decimation was always intended to affect the 90% who remain standing, after all. I expect that bureaucracies will drag their feet on policies they don't like. But there should be limits to how brazen it can be given that they are supposed to be nonpartisan employees of all Americans and not just Democrats.

This change has grown enough that some Democrats are starting to celebrate the Deep State they once denied existed. Some people in that new Deep State need to be fired and lose their pensions to nip this in the bud.

Trump may very well be an assault on language and decorum. I have not learned to like him. But the Democrats are an assault on rule of law. I have learned to fear them. We can survive the former while the latter is very serious, indeed.

Missing the Point

I won't dismiss the need to compete with Russia in the political sphere. But this description of Russia's invasion of Ukraine's Crimea as an example of covert political action (see page 8 of the embedded speech) is just wrong:

The Ukraine Crisis in 2014 was an example of this [covert political action].

We saw masked Russian Special forces—the “little green men”—and Russian-backed para-military groups seize buildings and infrastructure in Crimea.

This “masked warfare” was a nod to Soviet-style disruption.

But it was also accompanied by computer attacks, manipulation of social and mass media, collapse of the national financial system, and other deceptive operations.

Together, they paralysed the Ukrainian government, and the international community.

No effective action could be taken.

It was obvious at the time that Russia was invading. The reason for the failure to react was that Ukraine was in the middle of a revolution and the new government was being formed. So nobody existed who could order the largely ineffective military into action, the military hardly new who represented legitimate authority, and nobody had recognized authority to ask for foreign help--and who could have rushed in to help?

As I've long said, Russia's new style of warfare--and calling it "hybrid warfare" doesn't make it new--is nothing terribly innovative. It is actually quite simple:

Good Lord people, Russian "hybrid warfare" is just Russian aggression that we pretend isn't happening. Sadly, there's nothing new or novel about that.

Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia denied that they invaded Ukraine. And the West went along with that fiction.

Come on people, by all means counter Russian propaganda and covert influence operations (and Chinese efforts behind a more powerful communist China). We understood this in the Cold War, after all. But let's not study Russia's subliminal invasions to death.

But What Happens After Decades?

So Russia shouldn't worry about Chinese economic penetration of the former Soviet republics in Central Asia?

Chinese influence in Central Asia has increased markedly in recent years. For Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and even the relatively more closed-off Turkmenistan, China is becoming not only a major supplier of loans and investment but also a key trading partner. Some may interpret this as an indication that the influence of Central Asia’s historical benefactor, Russia, is diminishing. It seems, however, that Russia isn’t too alarmed by China’s growing influence in the region. That’s because, unlike China, Moscow’s interests in Central Asia are not just economic. Indeed, Russia has historical links to the region and security and political interests there, which will ensure that Moscow will be the dominant player in the region for years to come. [emphasis added]

Okay. So how many years will Russia remain dominant there? Really, nothing in that article should soothe Russian concerns over Chinese influence other than the reassurance that for some unstated number of years the Russians don't need to worry.

If the Russians aren't too alarmed about China's growing influence, it may be that they still feel required to conceal their appeasement of China.

My view is that the flag will follow trade in Central Asia, even if it takes more than years to happen.

Russians may be able to sleep soundly tonight without worrying about China. But the correlation of forces is going against them in Asia.

UPDATE: Pay attention Russia:

China’s advanced surveillance regime is taking root along the length of the Belt and Road—especially the Belt, the overland Eurasian routes that were the origin of the government’s ambitious investment project. Recently, Kyrgyzstan opened a new police command center in its capital, Bishkek, putting its new facial recognition cameras to work. The equipment was supplied—reportedly free of charge—by the China National Electronics Import and Export Corporation, a defense company currently sanctioned by the United States.

But no worries, Russia, you'll remain dominant there for years to come.

Options Expand When Shooter and Sensor are Separate

The Air Force is thinking about a lumbering "arsenal plane" that can fire all types of weapons, including air-to-air weapons, at the direction of other combat assets:

The Air Force is planning experiments and briefing senior leaders on progress toward its “arsenal plane” idea, looking at multiple aircraft options to fly with a large weapons cache to back up strike assets.

An arsenal plane would be a multi-engine platform that accompanies remotely piloted aircraft and fighter jets in combat and totes “network-enabled, semi-autonomous weapons,” according to a 2016 Air Force video. The concept has been around for years under the Defense Department’s Strategic Capabilities Office.

The idea “takes one of our oldest aircraft platform[s] and turns it into a flying launchpad for all sorts of different conventional payloads,” then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter said in 2016. “In practice, the arsenal plane will function as a very large airborne magazine, [and] network to fifth-generation aircraft that act as forward sensor and targeting nodes.”

I've noted the idea of an arsenal plane for bombs. And long ago I added the idea of an air-to-air arsenal plane:

Taiwan is struggling to afford modern warplanes to prevent China from invading Taiwan. They are modernizing their older F-16s, but so far haven't been able to develop their own adequate aircraft or buy newer planes from us.

It occurred to me that we have gunships that turn large transport planes into ground support aircraft. They work very well. Couldn't Taiwan use the same concept for air defense?

Taiwan has AWACS-type planes to watch the Taiwan Strait and Chinese air bases near their coast.

Would it be possible for Taiwan to pair up air-to-air missile-planes consisting of a large transport plane carrying lots of long-range radar-guided missiles?

If Taiwan's E-2s spot a Chinese air armada heading across the strait, the "air gunship" could fire off volleys of air-to-air missiles even as Taiwanese fighters were scrambling. Given that the Chinese aircraft would be closing with Taiwan at high speeds, the air gunships could fire while well out of range of Chinese missiles, counting on the Chinese aircraft to close within the missile range even if the missiles are fired while the Chinese planes are out of range.

Which was earlier than RAND's proposal that I mentioned.

More recently I've worried about the survivability of a slow lumbering arsenal plane and wondered if we could turn the B-1 air frame into an air-to-air arsenal plane--an AABONE:

Given the ability of the F-35 to fire anti-aircraft weapons on other platforms, could we equip the B-1 bomber with long-range air-to-air missiles (an Air-to-Air B-1, or AABONE)?

The B-1 could hang well back and let the closer stealthy F-35 fire a barrage from the B-1, without even disclosing the location of the F-35.

I suggest a B-1 for this mission rather than a bomb truck using a converted commercial plane for this threat environment because the B-1 could skedaddle at high speed away from the threat after firing the missiles.

Of course, the air-to-air missiles should ideally have a longer range than our standard AMRAAMs in order to keep threats out of visual range of our F-35s that are spotting and aiming the arsenal plane missiles fired from well to the rear of the F-35 (or whatever sensor is aiming the missiles).

And really, this is a great solution to the problem of the F-35s limited internal (to remain within the air frame's stealth protection) missile storage capacity. Ideally, the internal missiles never need to be fired, thus giving away the location of the F-35.

Note that the initial article raises the idea of the B-1 as the platform.

Who Has Better Combat Experience?

Does Russia have more conventional combat experience than American Army troops?

“Russia has rotated over 30 Brigades and regiments through the Donbas in the last few years, and they have gained valuable combat experience,” retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, the former commander of U.S. Army Europe, told Military Times in an emailed statement.

“And that is a different kind of experience than the US Army’s 31 Brigades have learned rotating through Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades,” he explained.

I'm not so sure about that assessment. Although I agree with the scarily effective artillery skills the Russians have displayed in the Donbas--seriously "I need to change my underwear" scary (do watch the embedded video at the link).

Russia has rotated elements of brigades through the Donbas--not full brigades but only battalion tactical groups scraped up from the brigades and regiments. And their experience has been as a firepower provider to a shell of militias around the BTGs.

And the last few years have seen static low-level fighting along the so-called ceasefire line.

So I don't think that more than 30 Russian brigades and regiments have conventional combat experience. It is experience. Which is valuable, no doubt. But is it really an edge over us?

While it is true that the Army's experience since the 2003 conventional invasion of Iraq has been in counter-insurgency, the combat experience of individual soldiers is very valuable as long as the units are refocused on conventional combat.

And honestly, I think our National Training Center brigade rotations do a far better job of preparing our brigades for conventional combat than the actual Russian rotations through Russian-occupied Donbas have provided the Russians. As I noted in this post about training for conventional combat, NTC rotations had been so good that our own OPFOR was far tougher than actual Iraqi ground forces we fought in the 2003 invasion.

Mind you, I'm not saying that the Russians lack the ability to seize and hold lightly defended NATO territory. They clearly do have that ability. And the Russians will have the time to dig in and prepare for a NATO counterattack.

But that's a different issue, as I've argued.

UPDATE: And don't discount the experience NATO gained in Afghanistan that transfers to great power competition.

We're Talking About the Russians, Remember

Would America risk a nuclear war to defend our NATO Baltic state allies?

Would the U.S. fight a nuclear war to save Estonia? The question would probably strike most Americans as absurd. Certainly, almost no one was thinking about such a prospect when NATO expanded to include the Baltic states back in 2004.

Good question. But would Russia really risk a nuclear war to take and hold those Baltic state countries?

And the author seems to be hazy on the Cold War when plenty of questions were raised about the willingness of America to trade (in a nuclear exchange) New York for West Berlin or even Bonn if the USSR started to overrun West Germany.

I don't think the option of putting a significant number of troops into that kill sack that would be cut off by a Russian thrust through Belarus and the Suwalki Gap is the solution.

I say let the Russians come in while hitting them with air and missile attacks plus special forces and irregular militia harrassment every step, extend their supply lines, and then hit the Russian army hard in a counter-attack. Destroying the Russian army in the theater is the only safe way to enter the Baltic states in force.

Also, the idea floated by the author to defend putting 30,000 NATO troops with up to 8 brigades on Russia's border that the deployment couldn't possibly be considered an offensive threat ignores that the Russians claimed NATO was a threat when we had nothing in the region, no logistics network, and no plans to even defend new NATO states.

I worry more about Russia using nukes in a preemptive strike on NATO brigades in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania than I worry Russia will use nukes if we counter-attack to free those countries.

Counting on limits to Russian paranoia and dishonestly seems like a bad call.

A Four-Hour Delivery Window is Unacceptable

Why the precision strike missile is a must-have for the Army in its quest for long-range precision firepower (LRPF)?

According to multiple sources, LRPF is the Army’s number one modernization priority. The reasons for this are simple: today, the U.S. and its closest allies are outnumbered and out-ranged by Russian and Chinese long-range surface-to-surface strike capabilities.

Sure, the range issue and numbers issue are both true. But we faced the exact same issues in the Cold War in Europe.

I think the real reason is impolite to say out loud but rather simple--the Army can't trust the Air Force to provide timely fire support when the Air Force has "better" things to do.

Which is why the Army would love "aircraft-independent close air support" with things like the GLSDB (ground-launched small diameter bomb (SDB)).

The SDB is a bomb. Designed to be dropped from Air Force planes. And now there is a ground-launched version that can be fired from Army assets like HIMARS.

If the Army was confident that the Air Force could spare some time from their busy schedule to provide close air support when it is needed the Army wouldn't look longingly at aircraft-independent close air support.

To be fair to the Air Force, establishing air superiority is a tough job all by itself against peer competitors. But the Air Force insists it must retain control of aircraft for air support to the Army.

And the evidence is clear that the Air Force considers that mission low on the priority list. Sure, they will place their bombs professionally and accurately. But like the cable company, it will be somewhere within a four-hour arrival window. So just busy yourself until they arrive.

Getting Lost in the Crowd

If you can't hide the fleet, get lost in a crowd of fleets.

Huh:

The U.S. Navy has been quietly developing what could be one of the most important, transformative, and fascinating advances in naval combat, and warfare in general, in years. This new electronic warfare "system of systems" has been clandestinely refined over the last five years and judging from the Navy's own budgetary documents, it may be operational soon, if it isn't already. This secretive new electronic warfare "ecosystem" is known as Netted Emulation of Multi-Element Signature against Integrated Sensors, or NEMESIS.

NEMESIS is not just some 'paper program.' From publicly available, but obscure documents we've collected, it's clear that, for years, the Navy has been developing and integrating multiple types of unmanned vehicles, shipboard and submarine systems, countermeasures and electronic warfare payloads, and communication technologies to give it the ability to project what is, in essence, phantom fleets of aircraft, ships, and submarines. These realistic-looking false signatures and decoys have the ability to appear seamlessly across disparate and geographically separated enemy sensor systems located both above and below the ocean's surface.

That's not so impressive, people still think we have a Mediterranean 6th Fleet just over the horizon.

Seriously, if NEMESIS works that will screw with an enemy kill chain. And is much better than the decoy emitters I suggested (with a nod to Iranian practice in the 1980s tanker war to defend their oil exports from Iraqi air attacks).

I don't know if it can make our big ships safe enough to get close to enemy shores--the Mark I eyeball will still spot the difference between a real fleet and an electronically simulated fleet--but while maneuvering at a distance the enemy may waste a lot of shots shooting at phantoms.

Macron: Europe is Brain-less

Well that's a fascinating take from French President Macron:

French President Emmanuel Macron claimed that a lack of U.S. leadership is causing the "brain death" of the NATO military alliance, insisting in an interview published Thursday that the European Union must step up and start acting as a strategic world power.

That seems like rather a damning indictment of the whole European Union defense initiative that seeks to build a European military force apart from America-dominated NATO, no?

I mean, if the Europeans can't act like adults on defense within NATO with an alleged "lack of U.S. leadership" that no longer provides the brains of the alliance, why should we think that a European-only military under the EU banner would have any brains at all?

I may need to revise my whole dismissal of the value of that sophisticated European nuance thing.

The fact is that Germany would fail to spend for a European defense as much as they fail to spend for NATO, as the alliance agreed to do during the Obama administration:

DER SPIEGEL has learned that the finance minister insisted that an increase in the defense budget to 2 percent of gross domestic product, as NATO member states have pledged to do, not be anchored in the coalition government's midterm assessment. The discord between the two apparently grew so heated that the Chancellery had to step in.

Remember, the Germans often claim they can't bear to spend money on defense because of their awful Nazi past that they apparently fear will bubble up again and cause them to rampage across Europe and slaughter minority "undesirables."

Which is a problem if true, and maybe we should take them at their word after they've claimed that for so long:

Seriously, is German unwillingness to pay for common defense in line with their economic status so strong that the Germans are willing to argue that they are barely suppressed Nazis at heart despite 70+ years of being part of the West with freedom and democracy?

If the Germans say they aren't to be trusted with sharp knives and actually believe it is true, maybe NATO and Russia should just pull back a safe distance and nuke the place just to be sure.

And there isn't a lack of leadership from America as much as there is a lack of European interest in defending the continent from threats, although the other Europeans' failings are less pronounced than Germany's contrast between economic heft and military weakness.

Yet amazingly enough, the Germans condemned Macron for undermining NATO!*

Note that our Secretary of State Pompeo is calling for the Europeans to stand up for Western values and be prepared to defend them against rising threats:

"Seventy years on ... it (NATO) needs to grow and change," [Pompeo] replied. "It needs to confront the realities of today and the challenges of today."

"If nations believe that they can get the security benefit without providing NATO the resources that it needs, if they don't live up to their commitments, there is a risk that NATO could become ineffective or obsolete," he said.

It may be like herding cats, but we are leading. But the Europeans don't want to face the reality we are trying to get them to understand. Europeans liked it better with the low-key Obama complaints that European NATO states spent too little on defense. The Europeans would rather focus on the Orange Man Bad fantasy threat than the real threats to Western civilization:

Few things are as scary to European governments as the prospect of another Donald Trump victory in 2020. In less than three years, he has already taken a wrecking ball to transatlantic relations. If he has another five years to play with, the relationship could be reduced to little more than rubble.

That is truly in the running for the most idiotic entry as I struggle for signs we've reached Peak Stupid.

America is adding troops and capabilities to European defense. Pray tell what is Europe doing besides letting Russia have the power to turn off their heat in the winter?

Brain death, indeed.

The uncomfortable truth for Europeans is that the blunt Trump may actually save NATO:

Is Trump's focus on defense spending really a danger to the alliance when, as he says, inadequate European defense spending must also be discussed "as it has been for years." Leading isn't about being loved. If it was, eight years of Obama--who the Europeans swooned over like giddy school girls--would have left Trump with a NATO where no member state had inadequate defense capabilities.

Macron may be all too correct about European brain status. They clearly just aren't thinking straight.

God knows, the Europeans need us if they want to remain free.

*Yet amazingly, Germany is finally promising to meet the NATO defense-spending target--albeit 7 years late in 2031. Which will go a long way to saving NATO, I say.

Enemies of the People

Persistent protests in Hong Kong have turned violent. Is this the excuse Peking needs to seriously bust heads to restore order (and total control)?

This is ominous (tip to Instapundit):

Hong Kong police shot and critically wounded a protester and a man was set on fire on Monday in violence that prompted leader Carrie Lam to denounce "enemies of the people" and drew a chilling warning from a senior Chinese newspaper editor.

Protesters threw petrol bombs at police after a weekend of clashes across the Chinese-ruled territory, marking a dramatic escalation in more than five months of often violent pro-democracy unrest.

"The violence has far exceeded the call for democracy and the demonstrators are now the people's enemy," Hong Kong chief executive Lam said in a defiant televised address. [emphasis added]

For enemies of the people, there are the People's Liberation Army and the People's Armed Police.

People helping people, it ain't.

UPDATE: I've heard people say that China won't dare unleash mass violence on the people of Hong Kong. The economic cost would be too high, it is said.

Perhaps the Chinese will decide that it will be more effective to conduct a more subtle crackdown. Perhaps these last months Chinese intelligence has been mapping the protest movement and will infiltrate, arrest, abuse, and disappear key protest personnel and collapse it more quietly.

But there is a risk to even a quiet victory. If people in the rest of China don't see the protests being put down in a high profile manner, what might the rest of the Chinese people think?

Will it look like Hong Kong got away with its long defiance of the Chinese Communist Party? Will it seem like that level of resistance is possible elsewhere as a solution to grievances? Is that the real price of not crushing visibly the protests in Hong Kong?

My view is that nothing--nothing--is a higher priority for the Chinese Communist Party than continued survival of the Chinese Communist Party.

So if to maintain their monopoly on power, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has to abandon territory (whether owned or claimed), go to war, or wreck their economy by sending in the PLA and PAP to shoot and beat the Hong Kong protesters while unleashing the undercover spooks to kill and kidnap protest leaders, the CCP will do so.

UPDATE: Thoughts on Hong Kong. Is the PLA already in Hong Kong in police uniforms?

UPDATE: If China is quietly funneling in security forces, it is more likely to be the PAP. And more on the issue. The people of Hong Kong seem to be sustaining their support for the protests/proto-insurgents. And dealing with this confronts China with an issue of bad timing given the US decision to stop ignoring Chinese economic warfare and industrial espionage. 

And I'll note that the 2008 financial crisis hurt China, too, and their responses to that--more debt and spending--are causing problems now.

Rule of Law is Our Friend

Iraq is a battle front against Iran and we should be fighting it hammer and tong. Surely we can exploit the fact that Iranian militias are killing Iraqi protesters, right?

Sistani backs reform:

The United Nations' top official in Iraq and the country's most senior cleric urged authorities on Monday to get "serious" about reforms after anti-government demonstrations that have left hundreds dead.

Iran's proxies are the forces doing the killing because in part the protesters (correctly) see Iran's hand in Iraqi corruption and are protesting Iranian influence as much as economic conditions because of the corruption.

Iraq is important to defend on its own, and I've long argued we must fight for rule of law in Iraq. But fighting Iran requires us to put effort into defending Iraq, too.

Really, Iran is willing to fight Israel to the last Arab. So why should Iranians be less than enthusiastic about killing Iraqis?

The Syria Prize?

So what is the balance sheet of Russia's intervention in Syria? Stratfor looks at it.

Stratfor says Russia's Syria intervention has and will provide "significant diplomatic, commercial and military rewards" to Russia. The rewards were achieved with a low level of troop commitment, too.

But they say that there is a risk of increasing and lengthy (and costly) violence, including being stuck between Turks and Syrians.

Let's look at the rewards and some potential problems noted by Stratfor (in italics, with my judgment following).

Russia has naval and air bases in Syria. This is true. Assad was willing to let Russia expand their limited facilities there. But what is the point? Russia's navy is in bad shape and is a poor investment given Russia's long land border. Money spent on a Syria presence is money not spent to defend European Russia from a mythical NATO threat and a growing (but denied) Chinese threat in Asia. And anything based in Syria will lead a short but exciting life if war with NATO occurs.

Gave Russia access to commercial opportunities in Syria. Syria is an economic wasteland and those so-called opportunities look more like being responsible for rebuilding Syria.

Increased the reputation of its military. I'll grant them this. Barely. On the downside is the embarrassment of their carrier deployment to Syria and their lack of precision weapons even for their small commitment of troops.

And gave it greater influence in the region and world, including:

--The intervention made for closer relations with Iran and Turkey. True enough. But their differing objectives inside Syria will be all the more intense for their presence in the same country. Support for Assad's survival is not going to paper over their long histories of conflict forever as issues post-Assad's survival come up.

--Compelled the United States to agree to the Syria chemical weapons deal despite concerns over Crimea. I don't know what to say about this time-bending advantage given that the chemical weapons deal was in 2013 (and did I call that accurately, or what?) and the Russian invasion of Ukraine was in 2014. Let's just say impressive if true.

--And forced regional states to worry about and talk to Russia. If that is important to Russia, they got it. Oddly, it does seem important to them.

Russia tested weapons. That's true.

Russia rotated officers through Syria to gain experience. The first part is true but it remains to be seen whether this provided true experience or was mere ticket-punching.

Tested command and control. True. But it was a small intervention in a low-intensity fight. So was it a real test?

Tested the use of mercenary forces. True. Although one part of the test was losing several hundred dead when they attempted to attack an American outpost in the east. And the use of mercenaries exposes Russia's aversion to casualties contrary to their reputation of shrugging off losses as they did on a massive scale in World War II.

And perhaps provided a model of intervention. Wait. What? I thought Crimea and Donbas in Ukraine were already the brilliant model of so-called "hybrid warfare?" I hope Russia doesn't again face opponents who--as Kerry famously explained was our objective--rather than trying to defeat Assad simply wanted to pressure Assad into talking. Imagine the pressure Assad felt knowing that regardless his job was secure. Consider, too, that America defeated the most potent threat to Assad--the Islamic State (ISIL). That's the model Russia hopes to repeat? Fascinating.

Helped get the withdrawal of some American forces. But once ISIL was defeated our eventual exit is guaranteed given that we never tried to defeat Assad. Russian intervention was irrelevant to that reality.

Saw the worsening of American-Turkish relations. Relations certainly worsened since Russian intervention in Syria. But that had nothing to do with Russia's intervention. Erdogan is the reason for worsening relations and long predates the Syrian civil war and then multi-war.

But fighting could intensify and require more Russian efforts to stabilize. True. Especially given the expansion of Russia's deployment to stand between the Kurds and Turkey in the northeast. Enjoy.

Turkey might go nuclear. That is certainly a drawback from Russia's point of view that is a natural development that flows from a breakdown in US-Turkish relations, when the US provides a nuclear umbrella over Turkey as long as Turkey is an ally.

Russia is now stuck between Syria and Turkey and between Israel and Iran. Quite true. Enjoy.

Bottom line, this has been a low-cost success for Russia but has risks in the future. True enough if narrowly defined as keeping Assad in power. Which is great for attracting the loyalty of thug rulers who will draw comfort from the Russian willingness to help the thug ruler slaughter as many people as necessary to remain in power. Yet that Russian reputation may not be that great for Russia in the wider world. eh?

The Russians bought a pile of trouble to get bases in the Mediterranean Sea region. I don't understand the point of Russia expending effort to get a foothold in Syria. I don't think that it does them any good other than to remind them of their Soviet glory days. And I really don't see the point of Russia's escalating role in eastern Syria.

Russia got a sugar rush from their Syria intervention that will wear off as the grind of dealing with that Hell Hole continues to suck resources from Russia. Putin will need another short and glorious war to restore the rush. And one day the short and glorious war will turn out very obviously badly for Russia.

Weekend Data Dump

Tomorrow is Veterans Day in America:

I don't want to hear another word about the "party of science:""A birth coach has been ‘ostracised’ by her professional organisation after transgender activists branded as offensive a Facebook post in which she said that only women can have babies." The Dignified Rant has exclusive video of the conversation leading up to the resignation:

I'd give good money if the birth coach had asked if the fetus will gestate in a box. It took 40 years for a joke to become a firing offense, basically. I blame the Romans.

I think we should all be able to agree that the people at the New York Times who gave us the 1619 project are just horrible people. America was founded on freedom and not on slavery. It took us a long time to make significant progress in making that foundation real for African Americans, but our promise of freedom and equality was the foundation of the struggle for equality.

Situation desperate but not serious in Congo: Extremists oppose medical intervention to stop Ebola.

I don't worry too much about the DDG-1000 itself. But I worry that it shows that the Navy can't build ships effectively enough to face a peer competitor as sea. Assuming China is building their ships on time and with advanced technology that works. Do we know that? Work on shipbuilding and until that is fixed make sure our training is better.

Protests in Hong Kong continue.  When you hear that Hong Kong has limited democracy for a few more decades, this is one aspect--China has to approve candidates who run for office.

I do worry a lot about a potential India-Pakistan war that could escalate to nuclear weapons. And I worried quite a bit about the February crisis noted in the next article. But the idea that India might "start" the next crisis in the region that spirals out of control kind of ignores that Pakistan's support for terrorism in India is kind of the basis of the ongoing crisis, isn't it? Why is Pakistan's support for terrorism that kills Indians seen as the steady-state normality? And yeah, I worry about India's developing Cold Start Doctrine if it settles into a pattern that the Indian military wanted many years ago.

I would like to again commend Democrats for their ability to make Trump--as tremendously flawed as he is--the clearly superior choice to giving them the keys to the national car in 2020 after watching them chug socialism like it's water.

When the Soviets crushed the dream of freedom (for more than 30 years) in Hungary. You wonder why East European countries wanted to join NATO and the West in general?

Communism dies in darkness, I suppose.

"Endless war" is a meaningless term and those who oppose it (and who really supports endless war?) simply seem to mean they don't want Americans in certain places exposed to theoretical danger. I was getting at that point with my post on rebranding the "global war on terror" as the "global troubles" to step back from the war prism when we are really in a stage of minor direct combat while supporting allies who are in far more combat against our common enemies. How is that deal not the way to go to protect our interests and people from direct threat at home?

Islamist scum are marching in Pakistan. Pakistan worries the Hell out of me. They have nukes and play games with jihadis in the belief that the jihadis are a weapon that the government can point at enemies or holster at will. What happens when the Islamists and jihadis want to be the government? Sadly, the protesters are right--the government is quite corrupt.

Related to the "endless war" entry, remember that nearly two years ago I argued that we needed to figure out why we might be willing to fight and die to stay in eastern Syria once ISIL's caliphate was destroyed. And well before the latest Turkish invasion to establish a buffer zone in northeastern Syria at the expense of the Kurds, I noted that the Kurds had to come to a deal with Assad because eventually Syria would be strong enough to move into eastern Syria despite our small presence. We risk a Mogadishu or Beirut disaster if we stay on autopilot unsure of what we'd die to defend. Five years ago I argued that the post-ISIL objective should be the removal of Assad, but we never built up Syrian opposition forces that could achieve that. So here we are, arguing about whether we should or should not abandon the Syrian Kurds when that decision was made long ago.

The American space race begins.

No! Way!

There was panic that Trump was abandoning Syria's Kurds. We didn't, of course. We still have troops there. We simply refused to go to war with Turkey over the Kurdish border area.  And so, 3, 2, 1 ... Trump is expanding our mission in Syria by protecting the Syrian Kurds' oil revenue! Is it even legal!! Note that the revenue is going to the SDF, and not to America.

The Russians continue with their caviar foreign policy despite their Cheez Whiz finances. Syria will cost them bigly.

The United states is training allies to operate in the Persian Gulf region to escort oil exports in the face of Iranian threats. It is proper that allies who actually import oil from the Gulf step up. And it is right for us to train our friends and allies while being prepared to back them up if Iran goes kinetic. And Operation Sentinel has officially begun. Will Iran test it?

I'm sure this Russian trade restriction won't drive Kazakhstan into China's arms.

Thoughts on Germans fleeing a dictatorial state and the end of that nightmare 30 years ago. Here, nobody who pledged to flee America after Trump was elected president have made good on their pledge based on stated fears that he would impose a dictatorship here. I wish the Germans had the heart to defend their unified democracy and the West that achieved that. The author is a fool to think that Europe without America and Britain will defend European values. Well, they won't defend the America-imposed Western values that created the free and democratic Europe the author wants to preserve.

#liberalprivilege

I really don't get why so many conservatives seem to have a soft spot for Gabbard. Tip to Instapundit.

I honestly don't understand (sorry, the update video in that post died) why anyone would trust Marie Harf. When Fox News hired her, I established the practice of turning off the TV whenever she was on.

No state health care for racists? Okay. There will probably be a definitions problem, but let's stipulate it is accurately assessed. Now do Islamists. Not that I don't have a lot of sympathy for staff who are verbally abused by patients and contempt for those doing the abusing.

Is it just me or does Representative Swalwell seem like an exceptionally moronic Congresscritter?

I do worry about having enough attack submarines. Will we be able to extend the service life of our Los Angeles-class boats until this can be straightened out?

The French 2013 intervention in Mali stemmed the tide of Islamist conquest there, but the jihadi problem persists. Jihadi hate and government corruption are a terrible combination.

Statistics of site usage got more confusing. I assumed that my Statcounter reports are more accurate than my Blogger statistics that are more than 10-20 times higher than the former. Although I can tell that the two differ in how they register links from Facebook, for example. And since I started Game Night Blog that replaces my former internal email newsletter, I've been able to see that the Blogger statistics very accurately track the usage from friends who are on the game night mailing list. So there is no statistics inflation there. It is very confusing.

No! Way! "Whistleblower" doesn't seem as accurate as "infiltrator."

South Korea is opting for the F-35 and may send them to sea, as well. The early reports of pilots praising the plane will sell more. Which is good given the Russian effort to sabotage the plane with propaganda before it could be built and sold.

As Iran makes hints of its nuclear weapons potential if we don't return to the horrible 2015 Iran nuclear deal (wait, Iran denies ever having a nuclear weapons program--are they threatening us with cheap nuclear-generated electricity?), America updates its GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator designed to destroy deeply buried targets.

The Chinese marine force is expanding. This author notes their use for Taiwan invasion scenarios but notes they will be more useful in peacetime power projection missions in the Indo-Pacific region. I think he is right. The marines aren't needed to invade Taiwan (although they could be helpful) and I'm more worried about the role of airborne forces.

The Army is working on robots that can follow orders issued in the field.

The idea of a bed and breakfast revolts me. But if I ever did go that route, Airbnb seems more risky than I'm willing to try.

Can Republicans relearn to accept outcomes of elections they don't like? WTF? "What in holy hell is the Washington Post’s Paul Waldman talking about?" It's as if the Resistance and impeachment efforts didn't begin about 3 hours after Trump won three years ago. And did I miss something or have Republicans accepted the results of the 2018 Congressional election that gave the House to Pelosi without a single denying hashtag? What election have Republicans failed to accept? What kind of partisan fool could write the article under that headline?

"Journalism." Trust but verify, as a great man once said.

Eventually, the kulaks will learn to be scared of Bernie, too. Remember to check the "definitions" section, as I annoyingly say so often. Based on inflation, it's possible everyone in Venezuela is technically a billionaire.

Those Extinction Rebellion loons are certifiably nuts and I guarantee they'll go from predicting extinction to trying to carry it out. Give them time. The tension of not seeing actual human extinction will be too difficult for these Fruit Loops to accept. And they will kill to "save the planet." Guarantee it. Laugh at their idiocy. But worry about their fanaticism.

Bad stuff is happening in Bolivia. I don't know whether loons are refusing to accept an election loss or whether ruling thugs are denying an election loss to remain in power. Tip to Instapundit.

Remember that the Trump administration actually sent weapons to Ukraine which was a change from the Obama administration which refused to send weapons to Ukrainians resisting the Russian invasion. Not that training and logistics aid was worthless. But we have in fact stepped up our assistance to stop the Russians. Tip to Instapundit.

Thirty years ago this month the Berlin Wall came down, ending the Soviet empire in Eastern Europe and eventually breaking the USSR itself two years later. Although Hungary should get credit for getting the ball rolling in the previous summer by opening their border with Austria.  I had enlisted in the Army National Guard in 1987 because of the Soviet threat. And in related news, a month later I'd have my master's in history and remained grateful I had not majored in Soviet studies for my bachelor's degree--I considered that too pessimistic about the longevity of the USSR. I had no idea... But I would like to protest this: "The collapse of the Berlin Wall was brought about largely by peaceful protests and a stream of people fleeing East Germany that piled pressure on the country's Communist government to open its borders to the West and ultimately end the nation's post-war division." [emphasis added] No, the Berlin Wall came down because of decades of American leadership of a sometimes reluctant West to resist Soviet communism in Europe and globally. Our efforts finally broke the Soviet economy and will to kill to maintain their imperial control over non-Russians.

A UN-sponsored 45-member committee of Assad's people and opposition people are working on a new constitution. As if Assad will agree to give up power after killing so many people to remain in power. It will meet and meet and meet while no progress is made. Except that the opposition members will either mysteriously pull an Epstein or get bought off one by one. This is a prime example of the futility of UN action.

It sounds like the American presence in eastern Syria to protect oil production facilities for the Arabs and Kurds there could eventually be a mechanized infantry battalion (800 troops). I say again, before we have a Mogadishu or Beirut barracks incident that exposes how little we are willing to suffer to remain there, what are we willing to fight and die for in eastern Syria?

The entire Russian takeover and annexation of Crimea from Ukraine is illegal, but Ukraine contents itself, close to 6 years later, with a legal victory in one small and narrow legal aspect of the Russian conquest. Ah, international law.

Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment against every elected Republican president in the post-World War II era (Ford was not elected and merely served out the remainder of Nixon's second term, while losing to Carter in 1976). Fancy that. With collateral damage to the reputation of Snopes, of course. Tip to Instapundit.

The Iranians let the facade slip a bit in their ongoing effort to pretend they are continually developing new and advanced weapons. I guess even the Iranians are getting bored with passing off ancient F-5 retreads as new and locally developed.

So this might happen:

I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this. But it's still true as the non-socialists in the Democratic Party get more desperate for an alternative to the flawed Biden. Although the reality is that Bloomberg doesn't have the appeal to get more than a longing glance that will simply poison relations between Democrats and Biden.

I certainly hope that Prime Minister Johnson is engineering Brexit on acceptable terms and that this author isn't just whistling past the graveyard. My fear has long been that pursuit of the perfect would kill the good (or adequate) Brexit. Getting out was the key, I thought, and worry about fixing flaws once out. But maybe I'm wrong and Johnson will win and keep rule of law in Britain intact. I hope so. Tip to Instapundit.

Democrats went from denying the "deep state" to boasting that the deep state is all that is protecting the republic. I think my observation in this data dump that the "deep state" was initially just normal bureaucratic resistance to change that could hurt it (admittedly motivated by partisanship that bent and broke laws to lead that Resistance) that became self aware of its power to be the Deep State explains that shift in Democratic thinking.

Russia isn't going to keep its reputation for supporting scumbag rulers no matter what with this discovery. Apparently the Estonians and Czechs discovered that the Russian hacker group Turla infiltrated the Iranian hacker group labelled APT34 and launched attacks for 18 months disguised as Iranians. So the Russians wanted other countries--mostly in the Middle East--pissed off at Iran. Perhaps the Russians went to Arab countries and promised to get "Iran" to stop their cyber-attacks?

Under the terms of the 1994 peace deal between Jordan and Israel, Jordan has refused to renew a lease that allowed Israel to continue to farm some agricultural land that Israelis had farmed for 70 years. This is being called a sign of worsening relations. Sure. But it was part of the deal. Who knows? Perhaps in the future the lease will be reopened after proving the point that Jordan wanted to make.

Widespread protests against the Lebanese government continue.

So Arnold is now teaming up with eco-scold Thunberg? Of course he is. Skynet needs to cripple humanity's capacity to fight the robots. And sending that vintage T-800 model on one more mission must show how desperate the AI is.

The Kurds are playing hard ball with the Europeans, threatening to release jihadis from European countries unless the Europeans get tougher on Turkey. The Europeans would prefer the Kurds to hold on to those "European" jihadis. Which is kind of funny when you consider how emphatically the Europeans condemned our Guantanamo Bay detention facility for captured jihadis. Of course, Erdogan has the option of unleashing Syrian refugees into Europe in response to any European actions against Turkey.

Iran could respond to America's expanding sanctions by (again) using military force. I did warn about that. And Iran has threatened America and our allies recently.

The good news is that Iran has discovered a "massive" oil field,  meaning that Iran no longer needs to alienate the United States by so aggressively and single-mindedly pursuing safe and clean nuclear energy!

If the Democrats are hoping their non-stop impeachment effort launched about 5 hours after Trump won in 2016 will induce "Trump fatigue" and give them the White House next year they are way off base when it comes to me. I'm outraged at the Democrats for their Ahab-like obsession with the Great Orange Whale. That has been the primary source of the constant turmoil at the national level. I blame Democrats (and their media allies) and not Trump. And I have a long history of intensely disliking Trump! I didn't even vote for him in 2016. But now I will figuratively (that's for you, Biden) walk across broken glass to vote for Trump in 2020. So Bravo Democrats. Well played.

The Japanese are continuing their effort to use lithium-ion batteries in their submarines. Japan won't build nuclear subs but those two Soryu-class boats might be the closest you can get to the ability of nuclear boats to operate submerged indefinitely.

The Norwegians have declared their first F-35s to have initial operational capability. So they aren't fully working and integrated but can be used in combat.

The United States government should not be shy about condemning the Iranian-backed militias that appear to be responsible for the killing of Iraqi protesters.

What could possibly go wrong? It is dangerous that the auto makers are so desperate to get customers. If the Goddamned cars weren't so Goddamned expensive (every bloody thing is standard equipment now, it seems) this pyramid scheme of financing wouldn't be necessary to move cars. Tip to Instapundit.