Fortress Taiwan

The United States has accelerated defense deals with Taiwan.

This will help:

Pursuing seven sales at once is a rare departure from years of precedent in which U.S. military sales to the island were spaced out and carefully calibrated to minimize tensions with Beijing.

Well, that ship of calm relations sailed in the wake of Chinese pandemic misinformation, espionage, trade imbalances, propaganda, internal interference, foreign policy aggressiveness, and intensified internal repression in Hong Kong and Xinjiang.

There is interest in making Taiwan a hard target. The Taiwanese have a reinvigorated sense that they have to arm up to survive. And there is worry that if Trump loses the election that the Biden administration will distance itself from Taiwan to restore ties with China.

The deals reportedly include HIMARS rocket artillery and anti-tank missiles, sea mines and Harpoon anti-ship missiles for coastal defense, larger drones for surveillance and targeting, and anti-submarines weapons.

These will help in reducing what China can throw ashore, fighting the PLA ground forces that makes it ashore, and keeping sea lines of communication open for resupply or reinforcement.

I'm on record in Military Review as thinking American troops will be vital to eject China from any bridgeheads they establish. The rest of that Military Review issue with a focus on Taiwan and China is here.

Carving Out the Lighter Tasks Niche

Should Britain invest in long-range strike aircraft? 

Ultimately, the UK requires versatile, flexible and adaptive forces, that provide the broadest range of credible options for responding to a highly dynamic strategic environment and contingencies across the spectrum from sub-threshold, ‘grey zone’ threats through to, in extremis, operations against Russia. Within this, an ability to project credible power to deter and if necessary, defeat even high-end threats is key. The UK depends on the effective operation of the global trading system for its prosperity, as the Covid-19 pandemic has shown, this system is vulnerable to disruption. Although the cost of investment in enhancing defence capabilities may be high, the costs of a failure of deterrence and the outbreak of major conflict in a region of British interest, let alone that of war with Russia, would be exponentially higher. Nor can the UK afford to base its strategic planning assumptions and capability decisions on relying on others, namely the US (a point made by Hugh White with regard to the defence of Australia). The development of a long-range bomber capability would provide the UK with an enhanced means of protecting and projecting its interests in an increasingly uncertain and dangerous strategic environment.

WTF, why not? Britain already gutted their surface fleet to invest in carrier aviation. Keep going until Britain has no army or tactical aircraft, too, eh? 

And gutting the British army and air force is the plan:

[Defence Secretary Ben] Wallace, who had earlier criticised Britain’s “sentimental attachment to a static, armoured-centric force structure anchored in Europe”, promised that the future force would be “more forward deployed”, popping up in exercises around the world, and “better equipped for lighter tasks”.

Paying for all this will require cuts. A reduction in tank numbers and warplane orders seems likely. Will Jessett, a former civil servant who led the Ministry of Defence’s work on the last defence review, in 2015, says that earlier reviews were too cautious in getting rid of “sunset” capabilities. Britain should “carve out a niche where we could make a distinctive contribution”. Britain’s Royal Marines, for instance, are developing a “future commando force”, including small units that will be permanently deployed around the world at high readiness.

If the Russians are a threat to Europe--and they are a threat to the smaller NATO countries close to Russian power--tanks and tactical air power are invaluable and not a sentimental attachment.

That said, it would be nice to have a new FB-111-type bomber for medium-range strike that allied air forces could adopt. Long-range missiles on the planes would extend the range even more. Could the F-15EX be stretched to fill such a strike role? Would Britain and Australia be interested in buying such planes?

But hey, Britain will be available for lighter military tasks anywhere on the planet.  And Britain has one of the more capable European NATO military forces.

Have a super sparkly day.

UPDATE: This author wants a new B-52 for long-range strike. But it is unlikely that allies would purchase that, too. Is that really better than a new non-stealthy medium-range strike aircraft with stand-off weapons?

When the Magic Kingdom Meets the Middle Kingdom

Well that's nice:

Last week a few sharp-eyed members of the audience for Disney’s live-action remake of Mulan noticed something ugly in the credits. The film’s producers thanked, among others, the publicity department of the "CPC Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Committee" as well as the "Turpan Municipal Bureau of Public Security." These are the same political and disciplinary institutions that oppress China’s Uighur minority. Disney cooperated with them without batting an eye.

Do not become confused. This is not a Uighur "jobs training center" in China:

Do read it all and weep when you consider how invested some people are in promoting the nonsense that America is oppressive:

Selective indignation is not new. What’s striking about this latest version is its zones of prevalence. The sectors of the economy most wedded to the view that American society is systemically racist—entertainment, sports, media, tech—are the least concerned with the real and concrete injustices of the antidemocratic and hostile Chinese regime. This is the woke dialectic: dissent in America, acquiescence to China.

I guess you have no time to worry about actual dictatorship and oppression in China when you just know that at any minute the Trumptatorship will be revealed if you slacken your Resistance for a second. 

Selling China the rope that it will use to hang us doesn't begin to cover this shameful trend. Disney did not make China a better place by tying itself to China. But China sure made Disney worse.

But hey, maybe there is hope in China. Which is pretty damning for Americans not as freedom-loving as them.

#ACAB (All communists are bastards)

Next Generation Air Dominance

The replacement for the F-22 air superiority fighter is in the air:

The U.S. Air Force has secretly designed, built and flown at least one prototype of its enigmatic next-generation fighter jet, the service’s top acquisition official confirmed to Defense News on Sept. 14.

The development is certain to shock the defense community, which last saw the first flight of an experimental fighter during the battle for the Joint Strike Fighter contract 20 years ago. With the Air Force’s future fighter program still in its infancy, the rollout and successful first flight of a demonstrator was not expected for years.

Nothing is known about the plane, including whether flying it used an onboard pilot.

The jack-of-all-trades F-35 is good. But the much older F-22 is still the top gun focused on air superiority.

But there aren't many of the F-22 which saw its production run end much truncated in the post-Cold War world. But now the American military must face contested air spaces. We don't want to operate with enemy control of the airspace over our forces.

We'll see if being designed and tested digitally means the Air Force can get a replacement that is inexpensive enough to build in the numbers that the F-22 could not be built.

The Sea Control Navy Begins

The Pentagon has taken the job of planning the composition of the great power competition-era Navy away from the Navy.

Adapting to a sea control mission after the quiet sea days of projecting power ashore in the post-Cold War era will take time and the Navy wasn't planning fast enough or realistically enough to reach a 355-ship Navy:

The proposal, which will chart the course for a fleet of more than 355 ships, has been eagerly awaited by lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who have vowed to withhold operations and maintenance funding from the DoD until Esper delivers the plan. ...

[Secretary of Defense] Esper took control of the force planning project from the Navy in January after rejecting the Navy’s work, finding it too conservative, too slow and untethered from the budgetary realities expected in coming years.

The overall thrust of what Esper is looking for has been clear for some time: more ships, particularly small, fast ships that can avoid Chinese precision missiles while packing some serious punch, in addition to several new classes of unmanned ships to act as surveillance nodes, and afloat missile launchers. 

The Dignified Rant has long advocated this theory of ship planning:

I have another idea. Set a number of platforms that we need to perform the missions we need to protect ourselves. Then build ships to reach that number.

Oh, they don't all have to be Ford super carriers or high end Aegis cruisers/destroyers. We really can build some less capable and cheaper ships for many missions. Remember, our fleet is composed primarily of high end ships, unlike the past when we had a core of capable ships and then cheaper, less capable, and more numerous escorts. In a version of grade inflation, our destroyers are no longer the cheap tin cans of World War II but high end ships that are amongst our most capable.

Further, a lot of missions in more sensitive areas (that is, sensitive to US military presence) but low threat levels, or humanitarian missions, can be carried out by modularized auxiliary cruisers.

If numbers really are important--and I think they are--we can get the numbers. Yes, because of geography we have to build larger ships capable of sailing long distances, so we can't just build small corvettes the way many nations do, who just need to sail out of their port to reach their patrol area. But we could have a real high-low mix with a low end based on basic ships with decent weapons systems that could be augmented with mission packages, which we are building for our littoral combat ships (LCS) class, if the balloon goes up for a bigger war against a more capable foe. We already use neutered Perry frigates that no longer have their missile launchers. Why not build new, cheap, frigates designed to accomodate mission packages that turn them into potent warships in war time?

We can't go on the way we are with shipbuilding. There won't be more money for the high-end ships we build (and no, the LCS are no longer low-cost ships). And we shouldn't reduce our deployments and missions to match reduced numbers that will result from our shipbuilding plans.

There is an odd hole in the shipbuilding plan article: aircraft carriers. I don't think we can afford as many carriers if 355 ships is a real objective. Will there be a real debate about the worth of carriers?

Their survivability and value are longstanding concerns of mine.

I have concerns about the small ships planned. How will they deploy from the continental United States to overseas deployment stations? Or will the small ships, possibly unmanned, be permanently deployed overseas? If so, how do we protect them from being hit in an overseas Pearl Harbor attack when an enemy initiates a war and attempts to gut American forward deployed forces?

Still, it's nice to have a plan to actually start.

UPDATE: The secretary of defense is open to increasing the Navy budget at the expense of other spending areas to get the fleet ready for China.

Cheap Missile Defense

It took a special hyper-velocity round to do it, but Army artillery shot down an incoming missile with a shell:

A U.S. Army self-propelled howitzer firing a Mach-5 shell just shot down a cruise missile for the first time.

It’s a big deal. Imagine, in some future war, Army howitzers ringing a strategic air base in the western Pacific, swatting down incoming missiles so the base’s planes can take off and land unmolested.

The shoot-down took place at the White Sands missile range in New Mexico on Wednesday. An M-109A6 Paladin tracked howitzer fired a 155-millimeter-diameter hypervelocity shell at an incoming BQM-167 target drone, blasting it to pieces.

“Tanks shooting down cruise missiles is awesome—video-game, sci-fi awesome,” said Will Roper, the U.S. Air Force’s top scientist.

This took place using the Air Force's Advanced Battle Management System, which is an AI-assisted data fusion system.

This was against a cruise missile, but the builder claims with further work it can shoot down ballistic missiles. The description of the shell as a "super-aerodynamic, precision-guided" shell is unclear to me. Is "precision-guided" the same as "precision?" That is, does it alter course? Or does the precision come from the ability to aim at the interception point with tremendous precision? I suspect the latter, which is impressive. But I don't know. It is a clarification that I will look for in future articles.

The Air Force really wants ABMS. And if it works like that along with shells that shoot down missiles, it is a big deal in tilting the missile defense race in favor of the defense--depending on how cheap the hyper-velocity round can be made. The stated price is really cheap compared to missiles. Can that hold or go down with mass production?

Remember the problem Israel has that demonstrates the offensive edge. Israel's system helps alleviate the offensive edge somewhat but that is against dumb rockets. Tube artillery air defense would really help against precision.

Quantifying Morale

I've mentioned quantitative analysis issues when models try to measure troop effectiveness based on weapons quality. Terrain and weather are thrown in too a lot of times. But troop quality is a great variable that can make a hash of the whole thing. Is that measurable?

In an early publication I wrote:

Although there appears to be a consensus among military strategists and policy-makers that the United States must maintain its technological edge, the troops must be trained and motivated to take advantage of that technology. The critical advantages provided by highly trained soldiers with good morale are not easily quantifiable in peacetime. The lack of quality becomes quantifiable, indirectly, when one counts the burned-out armored vehicles of an army whose troops did not know how to use their equipment and who lacked the will to fight on in adversity.

The Importance of this invisible edge that the United States Army works hard to maintain cannot be overestimated. The disasters that can follow from incorrrectly believing you have a trained army are appalling.

There is an effort to fix that hole in quantifying battle:

Assessing enemy morale is crucial to warcraft. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, a political scientist at New York University, reckons human will matters enough for four wars in ten to be won by what starts off, in strict military terms, as the weaker side. Behavioural scientists are now, however, bringing the power of modern computing to bear on the question. Defence planners have long used computers to forecast the results of conflicts by crunching data on things like troop numbers, weapons capabilities, ammunition supplies and body- and vehicle-armour. The next step is to extend the idea into the area of morale, by quantifying the psychological variables that determine whether troops will flee, or stand and fight. ...

Crucially, this fieldwork revealed much about the casualties various types of units can take before survivors lose the will to fight. A typical fighting force, it is generally thought, will collapse sometime before a third of it has been destroyed. Some Kurdish and IS units in Iraq, however, fought on in a co-ordinated fashion after sustaining far more grievous losses. Artis therefore tried to classify and measure the belief systems behind such remarkable bravery.

In one post I noted the issue of the then-pending ground battle between British and Argencinian forces in the Falklands:

I still remember being in a political science class that year at the University of Michigan and hearing some guy who styled himself an expert explain that Britain couldn't possibly get a 3:1 ratio--which everyone knows you need to prevail in an attack--so couldn't dislodge the Argentinians.

I explained what went into that 3:1 calculation (it isn't just comparing numbers) and assured him that if the British got their troops ashore they'd trounce the Argentinians.

One effort described focuses on interviewing troops and then embedding with them in combat where possible to test the survey results. That's obviously a hard thing to do for potential enemies who won't cooperate. But it is a start. And if it works maybe proxies that don't count on cooperation of the troops of interest will be devised.

This is also interesting:

The research, he adds, has already led to greater emphasis in [Air Force] training on the transcendental ideals that underpin America’s support for its own driving ideological creed: liberal democracy.

I was bewildered in basic training by a survey I completed for some contractor:

This journal entry reminds me that we were given a marketing survey about why we joined. Of all the questions, only a couple focused on service to country. I found that odd even though I knew most join for money or training. Not that this made any of us mercenaries as our more liberal brethren like to say. The basic patriotism comes in by thinking of the military as an honorable and good option for training, education, and money. How many who also need training, education, or money would never even think for a moment about joining the military?

I'm not sure why the entry reminded me of it, but I still remember sitting in the room at desks while a civilian oversaw the survey we took. And here we are more than 30 years later and protecting the American free democracy is now recognized as a troop motivator.

Winning in Iraq

Let's not get tired of helping Iraq at this late stage. America and its coalition allies helped Iraq defeat a number of enemies during the Iraq War. Iran is the major external threat now. And this is encouraging:

The new prime minister (Mustafa al Kadhimi) is decidedly hostile to Iran. He has ordered the removal of many pro-Iran commanders in the security services and disbanded some units that were dangerously pro-Iran. Kadhimi went to the U.S. in late August to meet with the American leader and discuss improving U.S.-Iraq relations. Such a meeting was important because Kadhimi is the first post-Saddam (2003) prime minister that is not heavily influenced/controlled by Iran. 

Firing pro-Iran people and disbanding pro-Iran militias is extremely important in the short run. Cutting corruption and promoting rule of law will also help reduce Iran's influence in addition to helping the country prosper. But that won't be easy:

The 2020 government budget is $135 billion but taxes, mainly on oil income, are less than $90 billion. The shortfall must be obtained elsewhere. The Arab Oil states are willing to help, but only if Iraq can reduce the Iranian operations in Iraq and control the corruption. Most Iraqis agree with both of these demands but there are doubts that the current Iraqi politicians can deliver. Despite a year of violent anti-corruption protests and national (parliamentary) elections that have most politicians denouncing corruption, not much has changed. It’s not that Arab states cannot reduce corruption because several Gulf states have. The UAE is now less corrupt than Israel and Saudi Arabia is carrying out reforms. So why not Iraq? Unless the Iraqi politicians can demonstrate real change, the Arb oil states are reluctant to provide the emergency cash. If Iraq cannot get the loans it will not be able to pay salaries and pensions that a fifth of the population depends on. Most of the salary and pension payments are actually bonuses or adjustments. A lot of this is bribes and outright theft. So how the government actually makes the cuts, if no loans are obtained, will reveal how serious the current politicians are about reducing corruption. 

Even when military threats to Iraq are contained, this is a battle America and our allies mus help Iraq win.

It continues to amaze me that the victory we have achieved is so easily overlooked. Can we refrain from being stupid and throwing away our extensive efforts and sacrifice at this late stage when the efforts and sacrifice needed to move forward are so small?

As 2020 Progresses Another Crisis Looms

Lukashenko seems to be haggling over the price Belarus independence will pay for Russian support to keep Lukashenko in power.

Uh oh: 

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko on Monday flew to Russia for one-to-one talks with his counterpart Vladimir Putin as Moscow has offered security aid while urging closer integration with its neighbour.

The talks are the first meeting between the long-serving leaders and close allies since Lukashenko's disputed win in August 9 polls prompted mass protests against his rule, with tens of thousands taking part in the latest demonstration in Minsk on Sunday.

What can the West do in this crisis to halt a Russian Anschluss with Belarus that doesn't abandon Belarus opposition that it protesting Lukashenko's blatant theft of the August election?

This article says there are seven things, but it suffers from the basic flaw that Russia would never go along with it.

I don't know what is possible to help Belarus given its unfortunate position. 

I just know Belarus is probably the most important territory in Europe today.

Good Enough?

It is good that Iran's influence in Lebanon via Hezbollah is more shaky now. But is it good enough?

American sanctions and a huge and devastating explosion in Beirut have shaken Hezbollah's hold on Lebanon:

In Lebanon Iran-backed Hezbollah is under growing threat from the Lebanese people and security forces. After decades of Iran sponsored intimidation, Lebanese are talking back and telling Hezbollah and Iran that Israel is not the enemy, Iran and its Lebanese followers are. A lot of those pro-Iran Lebanese were in it for the money and in the last year Iran has cut its cash contributions by more than half. This is because of an economic crisis back in Iran. It was discouraging for Iran when they realized how many supporters Hezbollah lost because Iranian payments had ceased. 

That's nice. But is a weakened Hezbollah weak enough for divided Labanon to suppress?

I tend to think Hezbollah can endure this and that any hope of destroying Hezbollah will require a major Israeli ground effort. 

I'll add as I have a number of times in that scenario over the years that Israel needs to avoid hitting non-Hezbollah Lebanese targets. I know that there is some thinking that punishing Lebanon for tolerating Hezbollah will get Lebanese to rally against Hezbollah. I tend to think it will make Lebanese hostile to Israel and less capable of taking on Hezbollah.

We'll see. Or not. I've thought we'll see for at least a decade now.

Defending Europe is a Vital American Interest

This author thinks American troops in more than token numbers should not be deployed in Poland.

There is a long portion about European NATO states largely failing to meet the defense spending pledge, which has admittedly been a longstanding failure. One, Germany is definitely a shameful example of failing to make progress toward the goal. Two, Britain surely has made an odd decision to cripple the rest of their military to build two sizable aircraft carriers. Three, the NATO pledge is to be met by 2024, so there is time for states that aren't Germany to meet the pledge. And four, saying Poland currently "barely" meets the pledge is an odd way of dismissing the fact that Poland has met the pledge early. 

But what are the author's actual reasons hidden among that distracting filler and other non-arguments simply designed to anger readers and appeal to their biases?

If we want a tripwire, a hundred bored infantrymen will do: adding a thousand troops would make little difference in a fight against the full weight of the Russian armed forces. A serious U.S. troop buildup in Poland, of multiple brigades, would risk a classic security dilemma, with Russia reinforcing its units on Poland's border in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad in response. 

This is, to use a technical argument, "stupid."

The author says that Russia could smash Poland with a thousand American troops there; and on the other hand, if America dares to help Poland defend itself with more American troops, Russia can at will match American efforts.

But if about 15,000 American troops would require Russia to add forces, that sounds like a significant American addition to Poland's defense. Which helps deter Russia from striking Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania by establishing the core of a counter-attack force.

And honestly, if Russia reinforces their Kaliningrad exclave, let them! The Russian troops would start a war cut off, and if NATO does it right those forces would be destroyed, neutralized, or captured. There is a reason that NATO didn't jam more troops into West Berlin during the Cold War.

Also keep in mind that America's small presence in Poland is designed to eventually absorb a U. S. Army corps if sent there, which will be a solid formation around which other NATO forces can rally.

And even if NATO Europe doesn't do as much as we want to defend Europe, don't forget that Europe is an objective in addition to being a source of allies as long as America has a strong position in NATO. America has an interest in dominating Europe in order to deny any enemy control of that concentration of economic, demographic, and scientific power that has great military potential.

This article was simply the dumbest thing I've read recently. Did the author think nobody would notice the nonsense filler that conceals the paucity of actual arguments--that are stupid?

Weekend Data Dump

Hey, you effed up. You trusted NPR. Obvious language warning below.


It seems to me that rather than destroying other people's property the children of the wealthy elite could just walk outside of their own parents' homes and vandalize and loot them and make more of a point about privilege, no?

Lithuania is worried that Lukashenko will trade the independence of Belarus for Russian help to remain in power. Lithuania right now has Belarus as a buffer to the east. Lithuania would rather not give Russia a direct shot at Lithuania. Uh oh: "Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarus strongman Alexander Lukashenko, who is facing the largest protests of his rule, will discuss plans to further integrate their countries on Monday, the Kremlin said."

"President Maduro remains in control because he still has the support of military commanders, armed militias and foreign allies like Russia, China, Iran and Cuba." Funny, I was just thinking I hadn't heard much from Venezuela lately. Sadly, while Venezuela had problems before Chavez took control, his socialist "solution" and his inept successor Maduro simply made much more poverty and more concentration of what wealth is left. So about what you would expect.

The good news is that Greece meets its commitment of spending 2% of GDP on defense by 2024 already. The better news is that it plans to spend more. The bad news is that Greek defenses are geared toward facing fellow NATO member Turkey. Thanks 2020. Or maybe 1821.

Taxes? Wha...? Verdun? Huh?

The idea that Trump will become an autocrat if he wins this election is insane. Packing the court? You mean choosing judges within the traditional limit that match the president's views like every president has done? Gerrymandering legislative districts to bolster Trump? Um, the US House is controlled by Democrats. How did that work? Also, the current districts were drawn after the 2010 census during the Obama administration. WTF is wrong with these Resistance people? They said Trump would be a dictator after he won in 2016. He did not become a dictator. Instead he was allegedly satisfied with "dog whistle" autocracy. Bizarrely, Trump opponents in and out of the media weren't rounded up and put in camps over the last four years. But this time for sure he'll be a dictator? These people are nuts. Why they are allowed to write with sharp objects is beyond me. Of course, this insanity is done online with keyboards. Which might explain a lot, actually.

I've noted the AI pilots we recently tested against human pilots. The robots don't need to be superior to be better--just good enough to make attrition between quickly manufactured robot pilots and human pilots who take years to be good a losing proposition for the humans. Strategypage has more.

"Were the lockdowns a mistake? To that nagging question, the answer increasingly seems to be yes." I was on board the two-week lockdown to bend the infection curve to prevent our medical system from being overwhelmed. I thought it might be three weeks. And I didn't complain about four. But since then, even as we successfully bent the curve and found our worst-case computer projections were way too pessimistic, I started to have doubts. It seems clear that after four weeks this approach has been a mistake. I can forgive such an error early when we knew little and feared much. What's the excuse for persisting in that erroneous judgment?

As long as there is some talk about Eisenhower's warning about the "military-industrial complex," let's remember the rest of that warning.

We have spent the last two decades fighting radicalized jihadists who hate America in order to protect our cities from terrorists. While we weren't looking, Marxists who hate America have radicalized too many Americans and now our cities are being sacked by radicalized fanatics. This is effed up.

The goal is 100%, doncha know? Once you accept a certain percentage of violence you open the gates to calling anything at all "mostly peaceful," including "War is 99% boredom and 1% sheer terror." And face it, if there were 570 riots without the large denominator of actual peaceful demonstrations to dilute the percentage, the absolute number would be horrifying if anybody but media-approved causes were behind them. Remember, as I often preface my remarks, of course Black lives matter. Our Constitution and laws require that. But Black Lives Matter is a Marxist group that should be rejected, and its rioting scum membership should be arrested and prosecuted. Maybe then we can do something useful on race relations. Tip to Instapundit.

Their names won't be on any professional sports players' jerseys.

I really don't get how America is systemically racist because some white people owned slaves over 150 years ago; but you cannot call all of Islam systemically jihadists because some Islamic people attacked America on September 11th, just 19 years ago. Face it, both generalizations of group guilt are BS.

Isn't it kind of funny that the most persistent Marxist insurrection violence is taking place in Portland, Oregon, which has a government and people so left wing that it has been (gently and lovingly) mocked in a series called Portlandia?

I have opposed some Trump policies. I cannot be accused of being a Trump loyalist. I still don't like him, although he can sometimes be funny and the Democratic overreaction to him can leave me shaking my head over their stupidity. I hope that Trump's style will fade in the Republican party when he leaves office in 2025. And I expect it will. What won't change is the Twitter-style political world. We can't go back from that anymore than we could retreat from YouTube (Obama), television (Kennedy), or radio (FDR). So if a lot of the clearly untrustworthy traditional media goes broke? Well, those reporters can learn to code. I won't cry because they embarked on a murder-suicide pact with Trump that ended up with them missing Trump while inflicting a fatal wound on themselves. What also won't change is that I will offer my honest views on the national security issues of the day on The Dignified Rant, regardless of what Trump supports or opposes. Anyway, I'll vote for Trump. And I won't feel soiled doing so. I really do want to thank Democrats for giving that gift to me. And if there are more liberals screaming at the sky in anguish after this election? Well, that would be great.

Having abandoned cable TV, I've been on YouTube more. The Critical Drinker provides entertaining reviews of movies and series. I find it amusing that the author has developed a far drunker and far more Scottish accent (was that redundant?) than he started with.

A reminder that if Trump really was responsible for the riots in our cities as Democrats now like to claim, they wouldn't have spent months calling them "mostly peaceful." Via Instapundit. 

I'm not sure what BS excuse will be used, but there is no way Biden will debate Trump. Via Instapundit.

Thank you sir, may I have another: 

 

 

I'm loath to disregard polls because they show Biden winning. I want to believe that Trump support is under-polled but worry about counting on that. But the polls are done by people who loathe Trump and there are ways to undermine the integrity of polls. Via Instapundit.

If political decisions made the Xi Jinping Flu pandemic worse in America, explain to me again why you'd choose Trump as the fall guy?

 

After the Cold War, the Army's artillery atrophied and shrunk as it relied on the Air Force for fire support. It worked. But with the rise of peer competitors, Air supremacy is no longer something American troops can assume. So the Army is working on artillery, including the ability to shoot at targets from 500 to 2000 kilometers away. Progress is coming soon.

Explain to me again how CNN isn't an arm of the Democratic Party. Tip to Instapundit.

The Republic of Palau is offering the United States military base options. I've long been an advocate of getting more baskets in the western Pacific to oppose China. But China is also active in this arena.

If freedom of speech relied on pen and typewriter, the ability to Newspeak your words online wouldn't worry me. But reality being what it is, this is a major disaster for freedom of speech. I mean, my God this is bad.

Here be monsters. Via Instapundit. Oh what to do?

More on the Kosovo-Serbia deal. Like I said in this post, it isn't a peace treaty--but it is a step toward peace.

Aren't all those videos and Tweets asserting that cities are just fine around the authors in their upper class areas--contrary to the "myth" of urban violence--just the modern version of saying "Let them eat cake"?

Britain is looking at legislation on Northern Ireland that Britain says is to provide a safety net in case the EU tries to screw Britain. What are the odds of that? The pro-EU propaganda against Britain as a "rogue state" seems in full charge mode. Maybe it is just me but it seems like Britain is just trying to counter the EU's continuing resistance--along with British collaborators who reject the 2016 vote of the people to leave the EU--to accepting Brexit in a hope of keeping Britain inside the EU by hook or crook even at this late date.

There is more anti-Trump junk about the pandemic in the media that ignores context of the time and pretends like his view was anything out of the ordinary for the time even for the media--or even not known back then! Remember, public health officials in and out of the government were downplaying mask use back then not because masks don't work but because public health officials wanted scarce mask supplies to be available for medical staff. That is, the Xi Jinping Flu pandemic threat was downplayed to avoid panic. Remember, too, that at some point in the media there was a lot of media coverage of alarmist models that predicted massive death tolls. The models were completely wrong and we needed some calming words. The timelines are blending for me, but there was no consensus for drastic actions then; and pretending Trump stood athwart the "science" to kill Americans is insane. Honestly, despite the effort to avoid panic what different policies could have been followed than we did follow that don't rely on magically creating knowledge, capabilities, and supplies that simply did not exist then? To believe that Trump prevented better actions means you must arrest Bob Woodward for keeping that vital information to himself until now, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands who might have lived. Or is this all simply leftist propaganda now? There will be a lot of this propaganda between now and the election--and beyond it, of course.

Training to beat submarines.

Perhaps you thought my description of the some of the "revolutionaries" in the streets as "cul-de-sac communists." Well. Put them in prison with the "people" they profess to side with. Although I'm open to using Guantanamo Bay, which we can't use to hold jihadis these days for some reason.

Honestly, when a "bombshell" that will finally get Trump is released I yawn. Long ago the Democrats went from "the boy who cried wolf" to "the boy who cried squirrel." To Hell with them. 

Politics and that damned reality that can't be wished away.

In five years liberal academics will report about city "retail deserts" in minority areas and blame racism.

Combat smart phones. My Signal Corps experience included the cell phone network in the field but not the CSPs.

Britain has a post-Brexit trade deal with Japan. Which is a big deal. America should negotiate one with Britain. I'd hoped we'd be first but maybe politics requires Trump to let someone else go first. Or maybe it is a second term thing to do.

Stars and Stripes won't be shut down after all.

Senate Democrats blocked a Xi Jinping Flu pandemic relief spending bill. Can't have people less miserable before election, now can they?

Why don't the Democrats just put whoever writes Biden's teleprompter stream that Biden relies on for answers to questions at the top of the presidential ticket and save a step? A ham sandwich with a (D) after its name. Tip to Instapundit.

Better late than never?

And you trust our media for information on the Xi Jinping Flu why, exactly?

China and India agreed to disengage troops at the point of contact in the recent crisis. We'll see if they manage that without an incident and get to talking about the dispute. Not much can be expected.

Collaboration that pays. The money obscures the concentration camps and surveillance state oppression.

A couple weeks ago I noted that the Saudis could no longer count on Pakistan to provide nuclear warheads for Saudi ballistic missiles. This article discusses the partial breakdown in formerly close Saudi-Pakistan relations. 

If I understand the grievance industry correctly, America needs to arrest and imprison a lot more women until they are about 50% of the prison population to demonstrate that men aren't being disproportionately punished because of discrimination.

Is China working toward a "launch on warning" nuclear weapons policy? That worries me more than China adding nuclear missiles to its arsenal. And that's why I fear a policy of deterrence for a nuclear-armed North Korea is extremely dangerous.

Will standardized F-16s sell?

Just remember that calling Antifa an "anti-fascist" group ignores that everybody--including socialists and even communists less extreme than them--are "fascists" as far as Antifa is concerned. Do not become confused. As I often advise, always check the "definitions" section.

The Xi Jinping Flu virus was in California in late December if a 50% spike in cough-related hospital visits is an indication. Huh. I've read that air travel links to China for the auto industry are one reason Michigan was hit so hard. Could the virus have hit Michigan that early or earlier? I ask because I had a strange hacking cough for most of December. I'd never experienced anything like that before. And that thought came to me many times at the time and not after the pandemic became known. I know a lot of people think they might have gotten the coronavirus but didn't. So I probably didn't get it. But I still wonder. Of course, "cough" might not be a good proxy for the virus. Tip to Instapundit.

No! Way! It's almost like they were trying to hide their criminal behavior. I mean, not all of them could have been planning Chelsea Clinton's wedding or scheduling yoga lessons, right? A lot of high-ranking people in our government had better serve hefty prison sentences to deter this sort of lawlessness.

Yeah, the NFL is dead to me this season. Let's hope their woke fan base can sustain their business model. Because the non-woke fans understand that the organization BLM is a Marxist outfit that doesn't really think Black lives matter (and of course they do--our Constitution requires that to be true), except as cannon fodder for their own objectives. One year of a player strike turned be from being a baseball fan to not caring. We'll see if pro football can win me back.

To be fair, Democrats will discover a lot of things are much better after the election. Via Instapundit.

It seems likely that Russia's Xi Jinping Flu vaccine is a Potemkin Vaccine.

I'm sure this setback in fighting the Xi Jinping Flu pandemic in France is somehow Trump's fault. Damn him for corrupting nuance and science!

Could the massive wild fires in California convince enough Californians to decline to vote for Biden in order to punish several decades of left-wing government decisions that contributed to this disaster? And would that give Trump more votes than Biden in the election? Remember that California provided all of the votes that gave Hillary more votes than Trump. Or will voters accept the convenient excuse of left-wing government officials that global warming forces beyond their control are at fault? And because Orange Man Bad for environment, of course.

Hear, hear:

While I expect Antifa/Black Lives Matter violence after the election if Trump wins (and even if he loses, I suppose, because that violence has existed long before 2016), I don't think the Democrats will initiate civil war. Their Fear, Uncertainty, and Dread campaign with the Orwellian name "Transition Integrity Project" is purely designed to scare voters into voting for Biden in a strange "nice little country you got there, it would be a shame if something happened to it" campaign. If the TIP FUD campaign fails--as it should--the Democrats will shift to another impeachment effort. Assuming they still control the House. Which means the American people have to keep swatting the Democrats on the nose until they stop pooping on our democracy and learn how to be a loyal opposition again.

A friend sent this. Hahaha!

Bravery recognized. Salute that man.

Prudes!

When Trump said that the Xi Jinping Flu pandemic could fade when warm weather arrived it was not some "magical" wish as Democrats allege now. It was a prediction that was wrong. Remember that the seasonal flu does dissipate in warmer weather and there was a hope based on that routine experience that Covid19 would do the same thing. So just stop rewriting history.

Bahrain has agreed to normalize relations with Israel. Bahrain is a Sunni Arab-minority government backed by Saudi Arabia with a Shia Arab majority that Iran attempts to radicalize. So there is no way Bahrain would recognize Israel without Saudi approval. And another Arab state recognizing Israel helps pave the way for Saudi Arabia to follow without provoking internal opposition from jihadi-friendly Saudis. Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) is trying to move forward in a dangerous domestic environment.

Thoughts on the Greek-Turkish tensions. 

Sure, nobody wants a war in space. But everybody wants to lose a war in space even less.

X marks the spot for the F-15.

Okay, just one more:

It seems as if Russian-supplied contractors are running bombing missions in Libya.

This is an interesting article on the background to the "maneuver" issue in the Marine Corps, and more broadly.

So Biden is saying that Republicans had to recruit "deplorables" from Democratic ranks?

Three American B-1 bombers flew over the East Siberian Sea near Russia, seemingly a response to Russia's recent naval exercise near Alaska.

Interestingly enough, the Military Review edition that my most recent article appeared in was delayed because a number of DOD intelligence and public affairs entities wanted to review it before letting it be published. If mine was any part of the expanded review trigger it certainly wasn't for intelligence purposes!

A good jihadi!

The United States and the Maldives signed a defense agreement. This language explains why it is bad for China: "Both sides reiterated their commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific that promotes the security and prosperity of all nations in the region." That language rejects Chinese attempts to control countries and territory, with a special nod to the South China Sea. This is good for America and India. And for the Maldives, too. China had been making inroads--via a debt trap--until elections put a pro-Western government in charge, as I mentioned in 2018 in a couple data dumps. I wonder what this will lead to practically speaking?

Is it just me or does the European Union seem more genuinely angry at Britain for leaving the EU than it is angry at Russia for invading Ukraine and generally upsetting the peace and tranquility of Europe?

If leftist nutballs can take the "okay" symbol and turn into a secret sign of white supremacy (explain to me again how a secret sign designed to show other supremacists that you are a fellow supremacist is even remotely useful if everyone uses it for something completely different?), why can't conservatives take over the Antifa #ACAB as standing for "all Communists are bastards?"

Is it just me? Or is the sight of California politicians blaming their massive wildfires on global warming rather than on decades of bad decisions by California politicians that predictably led to massive wildfires indistinguishable from primitive people blaming natural disasters on angry gods? Wait. What?

Teacher unions tell us that it is unsafe for teachers and staff to restart schools despite the fact that for most students in-person learning is vital. Wait. What? "Central Coast Congressional Candidate Andy Caldwell reported to the Globe that the Santa Barbara Unified School District allowed the children of teachers and district employees to return to in-class learning, in a secret carve-out exemption at Franklin, McKinley, and other elementary schools in the district." To Hell with the teacher unions. 

Homegrown Marxists are waging war on America. Unleash law enforcement on these violent scum to round them up and prosecute them. And I'd have no problem housing them in Guantanamo Bay until federal charges can be moved forward.

I suppose this film could have a serious purpose, but you could not include a disclaimer that "no children were harmed in the making of this film" the way producers have to verify for animals used in a film.

It's just sad. Just don't give the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch to Biden. At what point does early voting rule out replacing Biden with someone else because votes are already cast? Or will Democrats reverse themselves and declare in-person voting safe so those people can override votes in person? Is overriding your vote legal? How long would that tie up counting to avoid double-counting? Would the voters bother or believe it is safe just because it is convenient for the Democratic Party? 

Marxists--not civil rights advocates.

If Hiftar remains firm with the military, this chaos in the eastern Libyan government will not matter much in the long run. But Lord, the political chaos demonstrates the mistake of giving your enemy time.

Okay, I'll admit it. My son told me about the Yahoo! Sports app, so I watched the NFL on Sunday. The Lions reignited the traditional pain that being their fan inflicts. I didn't actually see any of the woke crap. We'll see. Hey, I'm only a man.

Sideshow Vlad

Russia is creating NATO hostility where none existed since NATO won the Cold War against the USSR.

Putin is supposed to be some geopolitical genius:

Russia's aggression towards its neighbours and the West risks a new Cold War, Nato's Secretary-General has warned.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph following the disclosure that Russia's opposition leader had been poisoned with Novichok, Jens Stoltenberg warned that Moscow's behaviour and attempt to establish a new "sphere of influence ... requires a response from Nato".

"We don't want a new Cold War, we don't want a new arms race, but at the same time we have to make sure that we are adapting as the world is changing," Mr Stoltenberg said. "So we are responding to what Russia is doing."

Putin is no 3-D chess player.

Russia is its own worse enemy. Will no advisor tell Putin he is effing up royally?

I swear to God, Putin simply resents that Russia is not longer the "big bad" the way the Soviet Union was and has to play second fiddle to China (and sometimes third or fourth depending on what Iran and North Korea are doing that week). 

I don't know how long Russia can pretend America is their main enemy while the real main enemy gains strength.

#WhyRussiaCan'tHaveNiceThings

Hang On, Yes. But What Then?

Is Taiwan's salvation just to hang on until rescuers arrive?

This isn't exactly right:

Beijing needs to win in a hurry, denying the island and its protectors time to react in force. Taipei mainly needs to stall for time. It needs to prolong any cross-strait war, reminding the international community it is a fighter while allowing the United States and potentially other rescuers time to marshal a response, fight their way to the scene of combat, and make a difference.

I fully believe Taiwan needs to hang on until help arrives. Which admits that Taiwan can't stop the Chinese from landing in force.

The problem is what happens when the rescuers arrive? What is the "difference" that rescuers will make?

As I wrote in an article just published by Military Review, if the rescuer oversees a ceasefire that allows the PLA to remain on the island rather than driving the PLA into the sea, all the rescuer achieves is likely just setting Taiwan up for the killing blow several years after the invasion and ceasefire.

The issue includes a number of articles from a call for papers on the topic of Taiwan and China. The entire issue is here. 

It's a shame that Mad Minerva didn't blog long enough to see the article.

Dealing With the Devil

President Obama hoped that Turkey's "tame" Islamists would be an example for the Moslem world on how to run an Islamic state. How'd that work out?

Turkey under Sultan Erdogan hopes that it can tame wild Islamists enough so that the jihadis won't target Turkey:

As of mid-2020: Turkey is still tolerating ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) within its borders where the Islamic terrorists conduct illegal banking activities as well as obtaining supplies from black market or legitimate sources. Turkey has long tolerated black market activities and since the 1980s this has included Islamic radicals doing business with these covert trading and supply operations. This tolerance comes with an obligation to refrain from carrying out attacks in Turkey. ... ISIL leadership made it clear to its followers that access to Turkey was only possible if the “non-aggression” deal was honored. In short, no killing people in Turkey meant ISIL personnel can travel through Turkey and access Turkey based suppliers. This Turkish deal with ISIL was unpopular with everyone else in the region, including Iran, Israel, NATO and the Arab states. Turkey didn’t care. 

With policies like this Turkey was becoming more of a problem for its traditional friends and allies. The main force behind this Turkish hostility is the Turkish leader Recep Erdogan.

If the Turks tolerate the jihadis in their midst too long, in time the jihadis will cause serious problems for Turkey itself. Erdogan might want to ask Assad how well tolerating jihadis who flowed through Syria to commit terrorism in Iraq worked out for him.

Do read it all. As an aside, I never read before that Erdogan had reduced his F-35 buy to a mere 8 aircraft, which is really just enough to sell access to them to the Russians and Chinese. I'm shocked it took as long as it did for America to cancel the sale and delivery.

Remember and Act on the September 11, 2001 Terror Attacks

Nineteen years ago jihadi terrorists attacked us at home in horrific attacks.

The jihadis still want to kill us. 

So let's not get tired of killing them wherever we find them.

Our enemies deserve nothing less.

UPDATE: And it is 8 years since the other 9/11 terrorism attack.

Another Damn Problem in Africa

Ethiopia does have pressure points for compromising on their GERD Nile River dam if Egypt and Sudan are ruthless enough and capable enough.

Interesting:

The feud between Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and the ruling party in the strategically important Tigray region is escalating, raising fears of military confrontation and the break-up of Africa's second most-populous nation.

The tensions revolve around the regional government's decision to press ahead with organising its own election for the Tigray parliament on Wednesday, in an unprecedented act of defiance against the federal government.

I had thought Egypt's ability to compel Ethiopia to slow down filling their GERD dam to safeguard Egypt's primary source of water was limited:

Egypt is "fuming" as Ethiopia fills its GERD Nile River dam: "Egypt's official response betrayed powerlessness rather than resolve." It is pointless to annoy Ethiopia unless Egypt thinks it can get money from third parties to calm down. I'm not saying Egypt doesn't have a reason to worry. But it is better to have a friendly Ethiopia whose dam inadvertently harms Egypt than an angry Ethiopia that won't take steps to alleviate inadvertent harm and which could try to actively harm Egypt in retaliation. Honestly, I don't understand the point of the war talk. Unless Egypt conquers the entire course of the Blue Nile in Ethiopia how on Earth can Egypt compel Ethiopia to supply water to Egypt?

Perhaps I was hasty. 

Does Egypt see the dam as an existential threat or as an excuse to get resources for accepting the dam?

Is that separatism really active enough to explode?

Does Egypt have the capacity to help the secession?

Would that secession have any effect whatsoever on the GERD dam if it succeeded? Or would Egypt leverage ending support to secession for concessions on dam safety and rate of filling?

And as long as I'm at it, is the Ogaden region of Ethiopia still restive?

Anyway, perhaps Egypt isn't as helpless as I thought to influence Ethiopia.

Proof of Life

To work with NATO--or even join the alliance--Sweden needs to demonstrate that the relationship doesn't consist solely of NATO riding to Sweden's rescue.

Sweden exercised its total defense concept for territorial defense this year:

The Swedish Total Defence concept originates from the 1940s. As Colonel Mikael Johnsson, military co-chair of the exercise planning group, explained at a RUSI event dedicated to Total Defence 2020, it is rooted in the idea that all elements of society have a duty to prepare to support the armed forces at times of crisis. ...

The Swedish approach to resilience was born out of its need to develop a defence doctrine to counter a powerful aggressive neighbour without the need to depend on military allies.

This hasn't been done in decades but Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine was a wake-up call. With a small post-Cold War military, Sweden sees its civilian population as a key enabler for their military, as it has since Nazi Germany worried about Sweden's iron ore exports to Germany.

Russian occupation seems far-fetched, so I'm not sure what value this is when the real fight will be for Gotland, the Baltic Sea, and the arc from Kaliningrad on the other shore of the Baltic to Finland.

In my view, demonstrating territorial defense capabilities despite a small military is necessary to make integration with NATO forces--whether officially or informally--possible. NATO wants help against Russia in the region, and if Sweden is a defense consumer in such a relationship NATO has little incentive to pursue ties that divert NATO forces to the defense of Sweden.

And if total defense of the homeland is necessary, isn't Sweden's large and unassimilated Moslem minority a new weakness in that concept given the problem of persistent enemy disinformation? That will be a touchy subject in Sweden.

To Be Fair, Evolution Takes More Than 220 Years

In the last data dump I mentioned that I'm reading Six Frigates by Ian W. Toll. The asides on bitter political division stuck out considering the current political culture. Here's more about the 1800 presidential race:

It was almost certainly the most bitterly fought election in American history. The political culture of the young democracy was still evolving, and there was not yet an established boundary between acceptable rhetoric and outright slander. The result was a campaign of personal vilification, rumormongering, and mudslinging not quite like anything the American people had ever seen before, or have since.

We had an actual Constitutional crisis after that 1800 election with some pretty amazing Congressional maneuvering before the rightful winner of that awful campaign--Jefferson--was seated.

But thank God we've evolved since 1800, eh? 

And then for the 2020 election the Democrats and their far-left shock troops said "Hold my beer."

Seriously, what is wrong with these people?

In defense of Toll, his book was published in 2006. How was he to know how much Twitter could devolve our political culture to encourage and amplify personal vilification, rumormongering, and mudslinging?

The Far East and Sipping Tea

Russia's Far East continues to show unrest. And the recent poisoning of a dissident leaves a mark.

Interesting:

In the Far East (Khabarovsk region) weekly anti-Putin demonstrations continue, with this week’s theme being the recent poisoning of opposition politician Alexei Navalny in a Siberian airport café. The poison was Novichok, which Russia government had used before to kill enemies. ...

Today the Khabarovsk protestors chanted “Putin, have some tea,” in reference to the suspected poisoned beverage Navalny consumed before falling ill. The Khabarovsk demonstrations began after July 9th when Sergei Furgal, the popular region governor was arrested on orders of the national government and flown to Moscow where he was ordered held in prison for two months as murder and other charges against him were investigated.

I've mentioned the unrest over Furgal and drew broader conclusions:

I don't assume the disintegration of the Russian empire that had a couple rounds in 1989 and 1991 is over.

And China has great incentive to spark such dissent and perhaps secession in Russia's formerly Chinese Far East.

I suppose that independence is more likely than China taking control of large chunks of this area. Russian nukes should deter a Chinese open effort to reclaim their territory.

The question is whether it is more or less likely that the locals want and can achieve independence than that Russia can retain tight control.