Counter to the 3 articles I just shared from Air University, and the article at bottom listed on the Subject Line, is the tomfoolery at the two links immediately below this paragraph, declaring USMC Commandant David Berger as an “opponent” of the Blob, or of having a “subversive strategy” to reduce military spending. With their insinuation, therefore, that Trump was going up against the MIC, and logically “ending the endless wars.” When in fact, he was engaged in a combination of redeploying U.S. military forces to complete the encirclement of China, Russia, and Iran, per his declared 2018 National Defense Strategy intention of “peer-competitor warfare preparation,” the first phase in any war, and therefore, the beginning of the war. And reconstituting them for the same war.
Why this is all pertinent, in addition to recognizing that Trump not only wasn’t going to “end the endless wars,” but fully engaged the U.S. with the Israeli “Radical-Right” in escalating US involvement in war against Iran, and against the Palestinians, as well as with Saudi Arabia/Israel in various other Mideast wars, like against Yemen, is that his successor, Ron DeSantis, has been anointed by the National Conservative Rod Dreher: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/no-to-trump-2024/
With the insinuation that DeSantis will continue those wonderful Trump policies, but on a higher intellectual plane, while we continue to see articles extolling Trump and his officials as being less militarily aggressive than they were in actuality, with DeSantis taking Trump’s extreme militarism to the even place that his New Right followers hope for against China! As any doofus who can read would immediately understand, if they read.
So to contextualize the “Radical Rightists” of the "New Right,”begins with doing a “network analysis,” and its no surprise to see the so-called “foreign policy experts” named above as part of the Straussian Hillsdale College network:
To decipher the “Double-talk" of the New Right takes some effort, and research, though not much if one is not too ignorant, with comparisons necessary to fully place in context what it is they’re actually promoting, as to give credit, they are masterful in “Cognitive Operations” manipulation as the New Right/Trumpite/DeSantis/Bannonite propagandists that they are. Which reading the second link below, gives some context to what is said in the first link:
It comes as no surprise to see the American Moment as part of the Schmittian/Straussian fascist network of “Big Data’s” Surveillance guru, Peter Thiel:
So this must be seen for the kind of New Right propaganda that it is, in my opinion, with the constant duplicitous insinuation, at a minimum, to appeal to honest “non-interventionists,” that we must turn to the New Right, to “end the endless wars,” their Republican elected official allies always insist more money must be given to the military responsible for igniting them.
For some perverse reason, I’ve had almost a lifelong interest in the academic study of military strategy. Probably from reading contemporaneous accounts of my father’s experience on the Bataan Death March and then 3 years at Carbanatuan POW (Death) Camp (see The Great Raid movie), and growing up in the aftermath of WW II, and in the Cold War, accounts for that. So when I gained access to military base libraries, such as at Camp Pendleton in 1971, Fort Gordon in 1985, and the Pentagon from 2008-2012, I was in “Hog Heaven,” and immersed myself in “strategic” writings. Even though I was never a Militarist, not even in my more hawkish period reading the works of the “Traditional Conservative” James Burnham. Which I would bet I read as much of or more than anyone on this listserve :-)
So when The American Conservative magazine began publishing as a harsh critic of the Iraq War, and the GWOT, and featuring someone like Andrew Bacevich with his “anti-militarist” articles and books, and military strategy critical approach, and Jon Utley’s astute criticism of the wars, I was attracted to, and was a charter subscriber for the magazine. Which I maintained until the magazine began to change changed, in about 2012, with the change of President and Publisher of the magazine. By that time, I’d become friends with Jon Utley since I’d met him at a Committee for the Republic salon in about 2009, and would occasionally have breakfast meetings with him thereafter, while discussing “war” issues with him, and of his magazine, The American Conservative. With my comments on that magazine turning from positive, to negative, not long after attending a party at Jon’s home in honor of the new publisher of TAC in about 2012, who had previously been publisher of The National Review magazine (TNR), as partly described here: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/gentleman-bruiser/, and still had family connections to that rag, as another TAC article described, with this excerpt describing his previous “success:” "Encouraged by one of his daughters, who was a TNR staffer and TAC reader, Wick came to our rescue when the 2008 recession had wrecked the plans that our former publisher Ron Unz had hoped to carry out. Wickwas everything TAC needed: a figure with substantial ties to the mainstream conservative movement (he had been the publisher of National Review), . . . "
And in perusing his TAC articles, he was relentlessly pushing the Republican Party, notwithstanding all that they were doing to oppose any unwinding of our wars under Obama, to include advocating open war with Israel, against Iran (see Netanyahu’s address to Congress).
And to especially include their obstructionism in reducing the military budget. And worse, in my opinion, was bringing the friend of some of the most notorious of neocons on-board TAC as a writer, Rod Dreher, now morphed into one of the most notorious of illiberal “National Conservatives.” (I will put this in the form of an article to be published in some obscure website :-) Furthermore, as can be seen in this panegyric to William Rusher of TNR, he was fully on-board the extreme militarism which TNR stood for, as those over the age of 50 have to remember, if they’ve maintained their memory holding brain cells: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/gentleman-bruiser/
The question has to be asked: “What were they thinking,” when bringing on such an ideological National Review loyalist, as described by the National Review themselves?
I shared much of my opinion with Jon over time, before he passed, to include the final dinner I sat next to him, at the Metropolitan Club, following Stephen Cohen’s talk on Russia. Which, in my interpretation, as I won’t put words in his mouth, he couldn’t disagree with. So it was with special dismay to see TAC fall into the Trump camp’s “Straussian” political culture when TAC took an even sharper right turn in bringing on editors described as “Claremont Institute Fellows,” and seeing their enthusiasm for the China War, as promoted by Steve Bannon so much (links can be provided for anyone questioning these points). Even worse, if possible, was for TAC (in my opinion) to become Trump’s enthusiastic “misinformation purveying” media platform, as they bragged of in Vanity Fair, as with the articles at the top of this email, promoting the lie that USMC Cmdt. David Berger, and thus, the Trump administration, was honest and sincere in “ending the endless wars,” when they were anything but!
All of which goes to explain how dismayed I was that “journalists,” especially “New Right journalists” are held up as “foreign policy experts,” when they their ignorance of actual military operations/strategy is so vividly on display like at the links at the top, so that they can’t see what the U.S, military was actually up to under Trump.
With the outstanding exception to that criticism of journalists being Sy Hersh!
But this article and excerpt from below shows Trump/Berger “won their battle on behalf of the Blob!” And we’re paying for it now (emphasis added):
"Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the commander of Air Forces Central, or AFCENT, said the Ninth Air Force is having to make do now with fewer resources in the region with more pressing threats in Eastern Europe and the Indo-Pacific region.
“We want to make sure we are keeping enough pressure on violent extremist organizations so they can’t carry out an attack on our homeland,” Grynkewich said during an interview with the Center for a New American Security, a Washington-based think tank funded by several defense contractors including Northrop Grumman. “That would have the potential to derail our focus on China.”
"The Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy and President Joe Biden’s National Security Strategy were issued in the fall and identified China as the top U.S. competitor and “pacing challenge” — with Russia and North Korea not far behind. The strategies still place importance in the Middle East, but the region now garners less attention after the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan in 2021.
“Iran is the other one we have to keep an eye on,” Grynkewich said.
"He said all U.S. commands are having to adjust their strategies, and for the Air Force in the Middle East that means relying more on brain power than traditional firepower.
“Where we are trying to shift our focus is thinking about how we reshape the region over the longer term,” Grynkewich said. “That means a lot of partnering … that means a lot of collaboration, that means a lot of longer-term thinking about what is it that we’re doing on a daily basis.”
"Several months ago, the Air Force established Task Force 99, a unit dedicated to developing a “culture of innovation” to do more with less. Known as the Desert Catalysts, the unit is based in Qatar and since its formation, TF99 has tested drones, rockets and other technology experiments that it hopes will streamline capabilities.
"Putting new emphasis on experimenting and inventing is a direction other military branches are also exploring. A few weeks after TF99 was created, the Army established its version of the unit — Task Force 39, which has also been charged with creating innovations that give the Pentagon more bang for its buck.
“Getting these new capabilities tested in [the Middle East] is what we bring to the table,” Col. Adontis Atkins, commander of Task Force 39, said recently. “Actually getting it in the hands of soldiers and getting that feedback.” Stop
All of which was so celebrated by the “New Right,” as Trump and GEN Berger began this next phase of U.S. military aggression (see links at top), while the New Right duplicitously “sold” it as “fighting the blob,” etc.
And see this to see that what Biden is doing, is a continuation of Trumpite military aggression, in the ideological tradition begun by the 1950s Conservative Movement’s ideologists now so beloved as “Traditional Conservatives.”
Air Force Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, commander of the Ninth Air Force (Air Forces Central), learns about one of the projects of Task Force 99 on Dec. 11, 2022, from Capt. Ana Smith of the 386th Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron, Explosive Ordnance Disposal, at Ali Al Salem Air Base, Kuwait. (Micah Coate/U.S. Air Force)
WASHINGTON — The top Air Force commander in the Middle East said Monday that the service will have to lean more on innovation to secure the region now that U.S. forces are out of Afghanistan and the Pentagon is focused on Russia and China.
Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the commander of Air Forces Central, or AFCENT, said the Ninth Air Force is having to make do now with fewer resources in the region with more pressing threats in Eastern Europe and the Indo-Pacific region.
“We want to make sure we are keeping enough pressure on violent extremist organizations so they can’t carry out an attack on our homeland,” Grynkewich said during an interview with the Center for a New American Security, a Washington-based think tank funded by several defense contractors including Northrop Grumman. “That would have the potential to derail our focus on China.”
The Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy and President Joe Biden’s National Security Strategy were issued in the fall and identified China as the top U.S. competitor and “pacing challenge” — with Russia and North Korea not far behind. The strategies still place importance in the Middle East, but the region now garners less attention after the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan in 2021.
“Iran is the other one we have to keep an eye on,” Grynkewich said.
He said all U.S. commands are having to adjust their strategies, and for the Air Force in the Middle East that means relying more on brain power than traditional firepower.
“Where we are trying to shift our focus is thinking about how we reshape the region over the longer term,” Grynkewich said. “That means a lot of partnering … that means a lot of collaboration, that means a lot of longer-term thinking about what is it that we’re doing on a daily basis.”
Several months ago, the Air Force established Task Force 99, a unit dedicated to developing a “culture of innovation” to do more with less. Known as the Desert Catalysts, the unit is based in Qatar and since its formation, TF99 has tested drones, rockets and other technology experiments that it hopes will streamline capabilities.
Putting new emphasis on experimenting and inventing is a direction other military branches are also exploring. A few weeks after TF99 was created, the Army established its version of the unit — Task Force 39, which has also been charged with creating innovations that give the Pentagon more bang for its buck.
“Getting these new capabilities tested in [the Middle East] is what we bring to the table,” Col. Adontis Atkins, commander of Task Force 39, said recently. “Actually getting it in the hands of soldiers and getting that feedback.”
For example, Atkins said the Army will soon be testing semiautonomous cargo trucks on Middle East terrain. In 2021, the Navy formed a similar tech unit, Task Force 59, and the Air Force wants to copy its success.
“[Task Force 99] is a shameless attempt to replicate the success of Task Force 59,” Grynkewich said. “It is a command that I have given some very hard tactical problems to … that they are empowered to go out and find solutions for.”
Even in the Middle East, U.S. forces are seeing influence from China and Russia, the AFCENT commander said. Moscow has been a supporter of the government in Syria for many years and Grynkewich said Beijing wields serious economic influence across the region.
Already strained U.S.-China relations have been tested further in the last two weeks in the wake of the Chinese spy balloon incident, which was shot down over the Atlantic Ocean on Feb. 4 after it traveled across the United States. U.S. fighter jets also shot down three different objects in the skies over North America last Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The origins of the objects shot down over the weekend have not been identified yet, U.S. officials have said.
Grynkewich said Monday that he knows of other high-altitude objects that crossed over the Middle East in the recent past. He declined, however, to identify them as balloons and didn’t say from where they might have emanated.
“Even though we have seen high-altitude [objects] in the region before, they have not been a threat,” he said. “The level of concern that I have about them is extremely low. … It’s not something that I would lose sleep [over] at night.”
