Why the surprise? I've been telling you and others here, this about Trump for how long? The ultra-militaristic Heritage Foundation has always said, and still does, "Personnel is Policy," and Caitlin Johnstone nails it here: https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/trumps-cabinet-picks-arent-lookingBLUF: "While Trump did campaign on ending the war in Ukraine, the president elect has given multiple cabinet appointments to strategists who say that the way to achieve that peace is to substantially escalate aggressions against Russia. Michael Tracey has been doing a great job compiling footage of Trump’s recent cabinet picks advocating extreme measures which happen to be in perfect alignment with the nuclear brinkmanship of the demented outgoing president and his handlers. "Sebastian Gorka, who Trump has named as his next senior director for counterterrorism, is on record saying that Trump has told him he plans on saying to Putin, “You will negotiate now or the aid that we have given to Ukraine thus far will look like peanuts.” "Mike Waltz, who Trump has selected as his next national security advisor, promotes a similar vision. Waltz says Russia can be pressured to come to the negotiating table via increased energy sanctions combined with “taking the handcuffs off of the long-range weapons we provided Ukraine.” Biden has since removed those very “handcuffs” by authorizing Kyiv to use US-supplied long-range missiles to attack Russia. "If it seems like these remarks from Trump’s incoming administration work very nicely with the actions of the outgoing administration, then you may find it interesting that Waltz just told Fox News Sunday that the two administrations are working “hand in glove” as the presidency changes over."
Here's a tip for you; don't believe any U.S. intelligence officer, retired or not, but especially pro-Trump intelligence officers we've been hearing a lot from as they've been campaigning for Trump. There's a lot of information available as "Open Source Intelligence," with what is below just a small sampling, all making clear how involved Trump was in Ukraine in waging war against ethnic Russians in Ukraine, and against Donbass Ukrainians, who were opposed to the US installed government in Kiev. I was told by some Ukrainians in Moscow in 2018, when there with Sharon Tennison's group, that Trump escalated the attacks on Ukrainians, ethnic Russian or not, and if Ukrainians in Moscow knew that, you know Russian intelligence knew it. But try telling that to pro-Trumpers, on who want to believe Trump is the "Prince of Peace," as he's making himself out to be, and as we've seen on this List, even while Trump was directing more arms be provided to the Azov Bn back in 2018 or so.
Then there is incoming SecDef Pete Hegseth (no amount of moral turpitude will keep Republicans from confirming him, especially after they've been watching him all these years on FoxNews), whose complaint against Biden, common to all Republicans, was that Biden wasn't being aggressive enough! Even while they threw up other complaints as seen so much from QI/TAC, "Biden has no strategy!" Meaning, cobble something together on a luncheon ticket and we Republicans will pour in resources like they always demanded of LBJ in Vietnam. Even Republican Statecraft, when a non-New Rightist is writing, recognized that Trump is who was responsible for escalating war against Russia.
Quote: "Kyiv routinely pushed this relationship’s boundaries, violating the Obama administration’s red lines around lethal operations by carrying out assassinations of high-profile Russian fighters on territory controlled by Russian-aligned separatists. The Kyiv-CIA partnership deepened under the Trump administration, yet again putting the lie to the baseless idea that former President Trump was somehow amenable to Russia’s interests while in office.
"As Budanov reportedly put it, “It only strengthened. It grew systematically. The cooperation expanded to additional spheres and became more large-scale.” This cooperation, as painstakingly outlined by the Times, went far beyond helping Ukraine defend itself against Russia in a narrow, technical sense — rather, Ukraine was drawn into a Western coalition for the purpose of waging a broad-based shadow war against Russia."
"WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine, a long-awaited move that deepens America’s involvement in the military conflict and may further strain relations with Russia. Moscow responded angrily on Saturday. "The new arms include American-made Javelin anti-tank missiles, U.S. officials said late Friday." . . . "Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said the U.S. decision will only make the conflict more deadly and suggested that Russia could be forced to respond. He also said the U.S. can no longer cast itself as a mediator. “It’s not a mediator. It’s an accomplice in fueling the war,” Ryabkov said in a statement."
Trump Presidency: 2017 - 2021. <fav_0.ico>
Quote: "Who sold the first American weapons to Ukraine? President Trump - Javelins," Kuleba said. "Who started the program of free transfer of the first naval vessels, Island and Mark-6 type boats to Ukraine? Trump. Who fought Nord Stream 2 and sanctioned the famous but now forgotten Russia's Fortuna vessel that laid this pipeline? It was Trump." "While Trump and many of his allies have seemingly became less enthusiastic about aiding Ukraine as the war drags on, the former president repeatedly took credit for Ukraine's military success in the immediate aftermath of Russia's invasion on February 24, 2022. "Speaking to Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo less than two weeks after the conflict kicked off, Trump said that "Russia has gotten in deeper than they ever thought possible" because of "the weapons that I gave and that the Ukrainians used so well." Then there is Afghanistan, that some peace activists give credit to Trump for initiating withdrawal from, when in fact, as Trump makes clear, he never intended to leave Bagram Air Base, as he saw that as a jumping off point for war against China, as all his energies were ultimately directed toward, and why he always demanded Europe pay more into USNATOCOM for war against Russia, but only so the US can husband its resources for war in Asia, against China, Iran, and guess who, that other Asian "Enemy" the US has: Russia. Look at a f-ing map: 28 miles from Vladivostok to the China border. Will the nuclear fallout from a US bomb dropped on China not blow over Russia so that they wouldn't get involved? Hell No! Trump's War on China is Trump's War on Russia," just as Biden's on Russia would have been on China. But Trump's "antiwar" supporters don't say a word of criticism against the war that Trump escalated against China as going up through the stages of warfare to where it predictably becomes kinetic. Is it that "Yellow Lives Don't Matter?"
But is anyone crazy enough to say US war against China doesn't necessarily include against Russia, with all US War Doctrine, since 1952 anyway, always including the two together for an attack. Especially as promoted by war fanatics like Conservative Movement founders William Buckley, James Burnham, and Willmoore Kendall, with all three openly admiring of fascism, and all three with General Curtis LeMay, and Barry Goldwater, in calling for a preemptive nuclear attack on not just Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and denouncing Kennedy for his refusal to do so, but on China and the USSR as well, as the "Plan" called for.
"At the time of the Cuban missile crisis, Republicans expected that it would be remembered for generations as a moment when a Democratic president squandered a historic opportunity. Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley all suggested at the time that Kennedy’s handling of the crisis represented a capitulation to the Soviets; that the president had bowed to Soviet threats when he promised not to invade Cuba."
Yet one of the most prominent people who opposed the Iraq War very valiantly who has run around with his hair afire supporting Trump lest there be nuclear war, wrote in 2017 how much he admired William Buckley for his political wisdom! With Buckley having been one of those leading the charge for war against Iraq! Go f-ing figure! People say there's no "common sense" left. That person is Ex. A for that!
"Austin added that "staying at Bagram—even for counterterrorism purposes—meant staying at war in Afghanistan." "As for using Afghanistan as a cudgel against China, the idea was promoted by Rep. Mike Waltz (R–Fla.) in the months before the withdrawal. "By abandoning Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan, we will no longer have a U.S. airfield in a country that borders China," he wrote in a May 2021 op-ed for the Military Times, adding that the airfield would be useful in a war against Iran too. "Waltz also said that "American intelligence resources" based in Bagram could support Uyghur resistance to the Chinese government, comparing it to the U.S. support for Afghan and other Muslim rebels against the Soviet Union in the 1980s. "This campaign caused the Soviet military to divert divisions away from Eastern Europe to the Caucasus and Central Asia," Waltz wrote. "Ironically, that part of Waltz's argument highlighted exactly why holding onto Bagram would have been dangerous. The United States would be more like the Soviet Union in this scenario, pulling its forces away from the most important fronts to defend isolated outposts in hostile territory." In fact, under that scenario, the U.S. would have reverted back to the opening stage of the Vietnam War when they placed Marines at Da Nang to protect the air base, then had to add more Marines, to protect the Marines protecting the air base, . . . . https://www.vietnamwar50th.com/1965_stemming_the_tide/U-S-Marines-Arrive-at-Da-Nang-South-Vietnam/ Quote: "This is the first deployment of a major U.S. ground combat unit to Vietnam. Although the mission of the 9th MEB is strictly limited to the defense of the air base at Da Nang, it signals another step in the United States’ transition from an advisory role to direct participation in the war."
I have not hidden my disappointment in, and disgust for, those peace proponents/activists who were snookered into believing Trump's Big Lie that he was going to end the war on Russia, while "Ending the Endless Wars," which he began in 2017 to "Make the American Military Great Again."
On Jan 22, 2025, at 1:56 PM, Gilbert Doctorow via Salon <salon@listserve.com> wrote:
Ignorant
and delusional: Trump proposes to continue
the Biden policy of ramping up sanctions on Russia In the past
24 hours, several leading voices in the Alternative Media have published
information suggesting that Biden’s awful policy towards Russia over the
Ukraine war is being overturned by the new President alongside the rest of
the Biden ‘legacy.’ In his 21
January article on Sonar 21, Larry Johnson explains how the Pentagon ‘has
reportedly fired or suspended all personnel directly responsible for managing
military assistance to Ukraine.”
Meanwhile the Pentagon’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Russia, Ukraine,
and Eurasia, is said to have already resigned. But does this mark ‘the
beginning of what some see as a strategic pivot’ as Johnson tells us? On his
substack platform, Simplicius76 makes the same point about firings and
suspensions. To this he adds the following interesting news: “The US this
morning in Washington, withdrew all applications to contractors for logistics
through Rzeszow, Constanta and Varna. At NATO bases in Europe, all shipments to
Ukraine have been suspended and closed.” On the face
of it, these dispatches are important and suggest light at the end of the
tunnel of the Biden years. But then I
wonder why the Russian news and analysis television programs have not said a
word about all of this. Instead, they focused on Donald Trump’s remarks this
morning on his Truth Social platform, which tells a very different story about
the President’s intentions. And the
Russians are not alone in ignoring the seemingly good news and directing all
attention to the bad news that we find in Trump’s written statement. The Financial Times this evening has
just published a lengthy article on this very subject. Per the FT,
Trump said he wants the Russians to enter into talks with the Ukrainians to end
the war NOW, and if they do not agree he will punish them severely. He intends
to impose still tougher sanctions on the Russian oil and gas industry and he
will put very high tariffs ‘on anything being sold by Russia to the United
States, and various other participating countries.’ Russia’s Sixty
Minutes program this afternoon discussed all of the points of possible
punishment that Trump put into his Truth Social text. They laughed aloud at the idea of raising
tariffs on Russian goods sold in the United States, since the total volume of
Russian exports to the USA in 2024 was 350 million dollars, and much of that
was for uranium which US power stations badly needed to stay operating. Th also
ridiculed Trump for some foolish and ignorant statements that he made to
journalists this morning: that he didn’t
want to hurt the Russian people, since ‘Russia had helped us to win WWII,’ and
that Russia had lost 60 million of its citizens in that war. For Russians, the question of who helped whom
to win WWII is precisely the inverse, and their war dead, bad as they were,
amounted to 26 million. As for
coming to the negotiating table with Zelensky, whom they do not recognize as
the legitimate president of Ukraine given that his term expired 9 months ago,
that is a nonstarter. Vladimir Putin has said repeatedly that the war will end
on Russia’s terms with or without a negotiated document. Accordingly,
what we see here is not the ignorant and delusional notions about how the U.S.
will dictate the end to the war given to the public by General Kellogg or
Michael Waltz or Marco Rubio, but ignorant and delusional notions from
President Trump himself. As of today, Trump is the laughing stock of Russian
elites. ©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025
-- Salon mailing list Salon@listserve.com https://mlm2.listserve.net/mailman/listinfo/salon
|