Category: US/Russia Relationship

Who Attacked The Civilians In Moscow?

The Daily Escape:

MLK statue through Cherry blossoms, Tidal Basin, DC – March 2024 photo by National Parks Service

An event in Russia highlights how difficult it is for many to believe what they’re reading and hearing. A terrorist attack took place in the outskirts of Moscow at the Crocus City Hall last Friday. At least 133 people were killed and more than 100 others were injured in the attack just before a performance by a rock band. Assailants who were dressed in camouflage uniforms opened fire and reportedly threw explosive devices inside the venue, which was left in flames with its roof collapsing after the deadly attack.

The Islamic State in Afghanistan known as the Islamic State in Khorasan Province, (ISIS-K) – subsequently claimed responsibility for the attack.

And that’s where the charges and countercharges about who was behind the deed started flying across the internet. Earlier, on March 7, the US Embassy in Russia issued a warning to “avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours”:

“The Embassy is monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and US citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours.”

Apparently the US Embassy also passed this information on directly to their Russian counterparts. It’s likely that the collapse of US-Russia relations since the start of Ukraine/Russia war makes it very difficult for Russia’s security services to take seriously any intelligence the US might provide about possible attacks.

All of this led to the US State Department saying that ISIS-K was to blame, while the Russians accused Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, Putin is all over the idea that Ukraine is behind the attack: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“They were trying to hide and were moving toward Ukraine….Based on preliminary information, a window for crossing the border was prepared for them by the Ukrainian side.”

Whether or not this is true, it represents a Russian verdict on Ukraine’s guilt.

But think about Putin’s “window”. The idea that escaping terrorists would head for Ukraine is nuts. Russia has 20,000 miles of border. The Russian-Ukrainian portion of it is covered with Russian soldiers and security forces. The Ukrainian side is heavily mined. It’s a site of active combat. It’s almost the last place an escaping terrorist would choose to run to.

Ukrainian officials have denied having anything to do with the attack, and American officials have said there is no evidence of any Ukrainian involvement. From Paul Campos:

“…people often forget that a) Russia occupies vast territories populated predominantly by Muslims, b) Russia has waged a brutal war of terror in order to subjugate some of those territories, and c) Russia has been a target of radical Islamist terror in the past. Consequently, allegations of ISIS-K involvement easily pass the smell test.”

It’s apparent that neither side is remotely interested in a comprehensive investigation. The State Department’s verdict was that Ukraine was innocent and ISIS K was to blame. The Russian FSB’s verdict is that it was hired nobodies from Tajikistan who were sponsored by Ukraine’s GUR (intelligence service) – and thus it was a terrorist act supported by the West. From Timothy Snyder:

“Russia and the Islamic State have long been engaged in conflict. Russia has been bombing Syria since 2015. Russia and the Islamic State compete for territory and resources in Africa. Islamic State attacked the Russian embassy in Kabul. This is the relevant context for the attack outside Moscow.”

Finally CNN begs to differ with the Russians: (parenthesis by Wrongo)

“In March alone, Russian authorities had thwarted several ISIS-related incidents, according to RIA (the state-run RIA-Novosti news agency). On March 3, RIA reported that six ISIS members were killed in a counter-terrorist operation in the Ingush Karabulak; on March 7, it said security services had uncovered and “neutralized” a cell of the banned organization Vilayat Khorasan in the Kaluga region, whose members were planning an attack on a synagogue in Moscow; and on March 20, it said the commander of an ISIS combat group had been detained.”

It is in Putin’s interest to pin the attacks on Ukraine because Russia needs to mobilize more troops to finish the Ukraine job.

OTOH, if Ukraine had anything to do with the murdering of Russian civilians on an industrial scale, the West would shut off their arms & ammo supplies. The US and NATO has zero reason to risk starting a nuclear war by allowing it’s Ukrainian client to murder and maim Russian civilians.

And Ukraine targeting civilians doesn’t fit with their strategy of attacking Russian airfields, refineries, railroads, critical bridges, and FSB offices. If they were going to kill civilians it would be workers in weapons factories or oil industry or railway employees.

Meanwhile during and since the incident, Ukraine attacked two Russian Ropucha Class landing ships, the Black Sea Fleet Communications Center in Sevastopol, and a few more refineries.

Time to wake up America! We need to see beyond the headlines in a complicated story like this terrorist attack in Moscow. This is why people who get their news from social media without better research into the full gamut of possibilities will make bad conclusions about what/who is behind this. It’s probably a good idea for all of us to keep our powder dry and wait for the evidence to tell the story.

To help you wake up, watch and listen to three guys play boogie-woogie on a public piano in St. Pancras station in London. This is an excellent tune to start your day:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Cartoons Of The Week – March 24, 2024

Sorry that we couldn’t publish a Saturday Soother yesterday, Wrongo, his two sons, granddaughter and son-in-law went to Barclay’s Center in Brooklyn NY to watch first round games in the NCAA basketball tournament. Here’s a pic from the nosebleed section:

Turning to cartoons, the past week had an overabundance of thoughts about Trump’s inability to find $500 million to bond the appeal of his fraud conviction. We’ll only show a few. On to cartoons.

Trump’s legal woes impact the GOP’s funds raising:

Trump thinks he may be facing the inevitable:

The trials have kept his followers in the herd:

Rep. James Comer ends Biden impeachment:

Trumpy’s buddy Vladdy had a better week. Russian citizens? Not so much:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Trump’s Constant Financial Lying May Be His Undoing

The Daily Escape:

Saucer magnolia trees, Smithsonian, Washington DC – March 2024 photo via Smithsonian Gardens

Trump has five days to come up with more than a half billion dollars in liquid assets or New York State could begin to freeze some of his bank accounts and seize some of his marquee properties. From the NYT:

“It’s crunchtime for Donald J. Trump….the former president must secure an appeal bond for roughly half a billion dollars in his civil fraud case in New York, a possibility that was called into question on Monday.

In a court filing, Mr. Trump’s lawyers revealed that he had been unable to secure an appeal bond despite “diligent efforts” that included approaching about 30 bond companies.”

This would amount to about 20% of Trump’s total net worth, but as Timothy Noah notes, much of the rest is already spoken for. There’s the $91 million bond he just secured from Chubb for his E  Jean Carroll defamation appeal. And a lot more:

“There’s $392,000 that Trump paid The New York Times…for filing a frivolous lawsuit. There’s $938,000 that a judge last year ordered Trump and his attorney to pay Hillary Clinton for filing a frivolous lawsuit. There’s $382,000 that a London judge earlier this month ordered Trump to pay Orbis Business Intelligence, founded by Christopher Steele (of the ‘Steele dossier’), for filing a frivolous lawsuit. There’s the aforementioned $5 million that Trump paid earlier in the Carroll case. There’s $110,000 in contempt fees that Trump accrued for bad-mouthing New York Attorney General Letitia James during the civil fraud prosecution.”

On top of all that, Deutsche Bank’s loans to Trump require him to maintain $50 million in “unencumbered liquidity” and a minimum net worth of $2.5 billion. He’s likely already in default of those provisions. From Rick Wilson:

“For decades, Donald Trump’s public image as the dealmaker, builder, salesman, and showman was his brand, his most significant asset, and the key to his multifarious con games. He discovered the secret sauce of modern financial alchemy was making it up, relying on the greed and desire of investors and banks to get some of the….Trump glamour. The swagger, the gold leaf, the…biggest, best, tallest, sexiest adjective…of every Trump project attracted bankers and vendors, no matter how rickety…the property or project may have been.”

His serial bankruptcies weren’t some fiendishly clever business practice; he was simply bad at making money on a legitimate basis. For all that, Trump is peerless at convincing people that he is a business genius with no need for their capital…[just] as he asks them for money.”

Did that take a lot of creative accounting? Of course. More from Wilson:

“Was there a yawning delta between what Trump claimed his properties were worth and market reality? Always. Did he tell the banks one thing about valuations when refinancing…and then turn around to tell local and state tax authorities that the same property…was practically…worthless…for their purposes? Naturally.”

Trump’s most successful business has been his email money-raising business that was targeted at lower-and-middle class angry white voters. He asks them to send part of their payroll, social security, and disability checks to him. Now, that big con is falling apart, with the donor list getting exhausted. The Trump base has realized that he’s not financing his campaign, he’s spending the vast majority of their donations on his legal expenses and now, on his fines.

His financial house of cards is falling apart. His always highly-leveraged properties peaked in value pre-Covid, and none could be sold quickly enough or for enough cash to give him the lifeline he needs to pay his mounting judgements and court fees.

He managed to get the Chubb Group to underwrite his bond in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case(s), but 30 lenders turned him down in the business fraud case, and this week, the “billionaire” had to tell the courts he can’t come up with the roughly $500 million he needs to stave off liquidation of some of his assets by NY AG Letitia James.

The truth is that there’s no reason why large financial/bond companies won’t take real estate as collateral for a bond or loan to Trump. The problem is that they WON’T take real estate collateral without a true, accurate, and independent appraisal for the value of the real estate collateral.

But that’s precisely what the NY fraud case found Trump was guilty of doing. Trump can’t offer up those properties to the bonding companies, because it would prove again the state’s case that he fraudulently overstated the values of his NY properties on loan applications and financial statements. It wouldn’t be difficult to sell one or more of the properties in a true arm’s length sale, but Trump would have to face the reality that he inflated their value.

NY AG James and all Democrats should remember that Trump’s properties are physical manifestations of his ego. Trump Tower was the model of that ego for decades. That’s why when Rick Wilson tweeted “Take Trump Tower first” the MAGATs reaction was rage. Apparently this is how the authoritarian addiction plays on their minds; they see his long pattern of fraud as smart business and see Trump’s facing the reality of losing in court as an attack on themselves.

No matter, Trump always portrays himself as a martyr, claiming the deep state is out to get him. But none of it will change that the facts are damning, that the pattern of fraud is explicit and vast, and that Trump is veering towards being cash-strapped. Just when he needs hundreds of millions to run his 2024 presidential campaign.

Depending on how the judgments pan out, Trump might become the first ex-president since Ulysses S. Grant to declare bankruptcy. But bankruptcy isn’t going to save him from having to pay his pre-existing judgements.

The irony here is that even while Trump is being taken down to the studs, he’s still at least even money to win the election in November. What does that say about the American voter in 2024?

Finally, with Trump in financial extremis, anyone who swoops in now to save him by posting half billion dollars is going to do it expecting to be compensated in some way beyond simply the repayment of the loan, if/when he loses his appeal of the fraud conviction.

What would Trump be willing to promise to keep his considerable fat out of the fire? Would Russia do it? What would Putin want? What would Saudi Arabia want? Who else might see an angle in this?

After all, despite how large we think $500 million is, it would be a cheap price to pay for many around the world who would wish trouble on the US.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Let The Games Begin

The Daily Escape:

The Tetons in winter, Moran, WY – February photo by See America’s Best

Wrongo, last Sunday:

“The House Republicans have effectively turned the Ukraine war into a free-for-all. Without US arms assistance, there’s a substantial risk that this war could easily escalate, with the US having only a limited voice in both strategy and tactics.”

The next day, as if on schedule, France chimed in. From Politico:

“French President Emmanuel Macron said on Monday that sending Western troops to Ukraine should not be ruled out….There is no consensus today to send ground troops officially but … nothing is ruled out… We will do whatever it takes to ensure that Russia cannot win this war.”

This kabuki took place during a crisis meeting in support of Ukraine that was attended by heads of European states, including German Chancellor Scholz, and top government officials like UK Foreign Secretary Cameron. Ukraine’s president Zelensky attended the meeting by video link.

The subject was first raised publicly by Slovak Prime Minister Fico, who said a “restricted document” circulated prior to the summit had implied that a number of NATO and EU member states were considering sending troops to Ukraine on a bilateral basis.

The too-clever part is “on a bilateral basis”. That’s a mealy-mouth way of saying that NATO wouldn’t be supplying the troops, just the individual NATO members.

Macron’s suggestion has started a free-for-all among the NATO members about possibly sending troops to Ukraine. As Wrongo said, the inability of House Republicans to mount a legislative program is clearly affecting both Ukraine and NATO.

Macron’s comments prompted a hawkish response from Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov:

“In this case, we need to talk not about the likelihood, but about the inevitability of a conflict….These countries must also assess and be aware of this, asking themselves whether this is in their interests, as well as the interests of the citizens of their countries.”

Russia implies that any Western troop deployment in Ukraine would trigger a direct conflict between Moscow and the NATO military alliance.

That naturally sent European leaders scrambling to backtrack: A NATO official told CNN the alliance had “no plans” to deploy combat troops in Ukraine. And German Chancellor Scholz​immediately said that European leaders unanimously rejected sending troops to fight in Ukraine against Russia. He was backed up by NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg (the same fellow who gave “permission” to Ukraine to bomb inside Russia using NATO’s soon-to-be delivered F-16s).

The US has always told NATO that it would be foolish to send NATO troops to Ukraine. But what leverage does the US have if it isn’t supplying its share of weapons and ammo right now when they’re most needed? The inaction by House Republicans was the precipitating reason for the hastily called European summit in the first place.

​One of the outcomes of the EU meeting was support for sourcing more ammunition from outside of NATO. President Zelensky offered a sharp reminder that the EU had massively undershot promises on ammunition deliveries. He underlined the EU’s failure to deliver 1 million shells by March:

“Of the million shells promised to us by the European Union, not 50% arrived, but 30%….

This includes practically everything, ranging from air defense missiles to howitzer shells.

As a possible solution, Czech Prime Minister Fiala said he received “big support” at the talks from European partners for his proposal to source shells from outside the EU for Kyiv. The Czech Republic is leading a campaign to raise €1.4 billion to pay for ammunition for Ukraine, in compensation both for the stalled US aid package and delays in EU deliveries.

This means that buying exclusively within the EU simply isn’t realistic. Region-wide reductions in defense spending following the end of the Cold War led to arms manufacturers reducing their capacity to make such weapons. And rebuilding the industry won’t happen overnight.

Widening out the view, Macron appears to be attempting again to assert himself as the leader of a united Europe, just as Europe braces for the possibility of a) no weapons funding from the Biden administration, or b) Trump winning a second term.

Given Trump’s antipathy toward NATO and transactional view toward alliances, Macron and others have stressed that the burden must fall to Europe to protect from future Russian aggression.

Macron also said he was abandoning his opposition to buying arms for Ukraine from outside the EU. This potential program is known in the EU as “strategic autonomy”, policies aimed at making Europe less reliant on the US.

These unilateral actions by Europe signal two ideas. First, that there is no Plan B for supporting Ukraine beyond sending them more weapons, and advanced weapons that have the capability to strike inside Russia. Striking inside Russia is key to Ukraine having a stronger position in any negotiated end to the War, but NATO fears Russia’s retaliation if longer range weapons are supplied to Ukraine, so they will come slowly, if at all.

Second, Europe believes as of now that Ukraine is losing. Wrongo heard on the PBS NewsHour that the best likely outcome in 2024 is for a Ukraine holding action followed by another offensive in 2025, even though Ukraine’s 2023 offensive produced very little. In this view sending more weapons to Ukraine only seems to buy time in 2024.

The alternative view is that Russia is outproducing the West in artillery shells and ammunition. And think about the Russia, China, Iran axis that Wrongo mentioned last week: Neither China or Iran will willingly let Russia lose a war, because they know who’ll be next.

Another way to think about this: Trump weakened NATO during his presidency. Biden was able to rebuild America’s credibility with NATO, helped enormously by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Since then, NATO has expanded, adding two new countries to the membership and by stepping up with weapons and financial support for Ukraine. Now, in the waning months of Biden’s first term, Republicans have cracked NATO again with their unwillingness to fund the Ukraine War.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Russia. China And Iran, And Other Thoughts

The Daily Escape:

Snow at sunrise, Grand Canyon NP, AZ – February 2024 photo by John Fecteau

Welcome to another Monday Wake Up. Wrongo wants to touch on a few different ideas today. First, a non-trivial topic that Wrongo plans to return to this year. When we look at the geo-political landscape today, the US is confronting a growing alliance between three countries, each of which holds ill-will towards us and towards our western allies. Those three are China, Russia and Iran.

We’re confronting them separately and also in the case of the Ukraine War, jointly. This is an excellent time to harken back to something that Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in 1997. He had formerly (through 1981) been Carter’s National Security Adviser:

“Potentially the most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China, Russia and perhaps Iran, an ‘anti-hegemonic’ coalition, united not by ideology but by complementary grievances. . . . Averting this contingency . . . will require a display of US geostrategic skill on the western, eastern and southern perimeters of Eurasia simultaneously.”

Today’s geopolitical landscape reflects exactly what Brzezinski feared more than two decades ago. Is the world heading toward what the late Brzezinski referred to as “the most dangerous scenario”? What should America be doing now to head off what we’re seeing from our three rivals? Or is it already too late?

Which presidential candidate will do the better job of blunting this potential power conflict ?

Second, what did the weekend’s South Carolina Republican primary tell us? Trump won by a wide margin. As of this writing, the tally has Trump at 59.8% and Nikki Haley at 39.5%. The media is treating this as a significant triumph. When you win by 20 points, that’s true.

The real story, however, is that Trump underperformed expectations and failed to expand his coalition beyond his base. If you doubt that, take a look at the polling group 538’s polling vs. actual results for Trump across the three Republican primaries:

We’re seeing Trump consistently underperform the polls by 7-8 points. Worse for Trump, Fox News’ John Roberts talked about an alarming exit poll finding that 59% of Haley voters in South Carolina last night (equal to 40% of the electorate) would not vote for Trump in the general election.

From Simon Rosenberg:

“It’s my view that something broke inside the GOP when Dobbs happened. That even for many Republicans, it was just too much, the party had gone too far, had become too ugly and dangerous.”

Trump and the GOP are showing signs of deep institutional weakness. They had disappointing elections in 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2023. They’re replacing the entire leadership team at the RNC due to their ongoing fundraising struggles. Today’s RNC is broke:

In addition, the GOP’s state parties have atrophied in some key battleground states. Trump is burning through cash at unprecedented rates to fund his many lawsuits. Even Nikki Haley out raised him last month.

Wrongo thinks that we’re finally seeing “Trump Fatigue”. Everybody has seen his act and has zero need to ever see it again. The assertion that Trump is strong beyond his die-hard MAGA base seems to at last, be untrue. But what does Wrongo know? When he retired from the F500, he thought he would go into private equity. But he was seduced into online journalism by the promise of very small paychecks and zero job security.

Our third story is for the birds. The Guardian reports that:

“The Eurasian eagle owl named Flaco, which escaped New York City’s Central Park Zoo last year, has died after crashing into a building in Manhattan, officials said late on Friday.”

Here’s Flaco in happier times:

More:

“Flaco was rescued by the zoo in 2010, when he was less than a year old. He was reputed to be the only owl of his kind in the wild in North America, and there were widespread fears he ultimately wouldn’t survive for long outside captivity.”

The Eurasian eagle-owl is one of the larger owl species. Flaco’s wingspan was reported to be about 6 ft. Ornithologist Stephen Ambrose wrote on LinkedIn that there was evidence light glare from city buildings’ windows could blind owls momentarily and increase their risk of crashing into the structures, especially at night.

This raises the evergreen question of how to keep birds safe in US urban areas. Federal officials estimate that one billion birds in the US die annually after accidentally flying into building windows. Wrongo and Ms. Right had this happen to us years ago when a hawk crashed through our lakefront cottage living room’s wall of glass. He was dead when he hit the floor. It doesn’t only happen in high-rise buildings.

Time to wake up, America! There’s glare everywhere, including in the media’s silly discussion about how overwhelming Trump’s electoral chances are vs. Biden. Trump has a very small chance of being elected in 2024. To help you wake up, watch this great video of England’s Prince William singing “Livin’ on a Prayer” with Jon Bon Jovi and Taylor Swift at the Winter Whites Gala charity ball at Kensington Palace. This is fun and worth your time:

The future King of England singing with the current Queen of Americana.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Cartoons Of The Week

The failure of the US Congress to provide aid to Ukraine in a timely manner is a massive rupture of the US’s standing both with NATO and with global democracies that implicitly count on the US to support them if shit ever hits the fan in their region. The bottom line is that the US is no longer a trusted ally or friend.

Jens Stoltenberg, a former Norwegian Prime Minister and now Secretary General of NATO reacted to the US failure to deliver by announcing he is giving Ukraine “permission” to use its soon to be delivered F-16s to launch attacks inside Russia:

“Stoltenberg believes that the death of Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny and the first Russian gains on the battlefield in months should help focus the attention of NATO and its allies on the urgent need to support Ukraine.”

According to Stoltenberg, it will be up to each ally to decide whether to deliver F-16s to Ukraine, and each have different policies. But he said at the same time, the war in Ukraine is a war of aggression and Ukraine has the right to self-defense, including striking legitimate Russian military targets outside Ukraine.

The criticism of this is that it could lead NATO into a European war that might well include nuclear weapons. Above all, NATO is a defensive, not an offensive, alliance. Finally, there are no provisions in the NATO Treaty authorizing offensive, outside-the-NATO boundary operations.

The House Republicans have effectively turned the Ukraine war into a free-for-all. Without US arms assistance, there’s a substantial risk that this war could easily escalate, with the US having only a limited voice in both strategy and tactics. On to cartoons.

Republicans have reduced the US to hot air:

Putin’s now hoping for a Ukraine surrender:

Moon landing dredges up old theories:

Russia’s Congressional dupes fail to see the problem:

IVF ruling has consequences:

There’s a sucker born every minute in Trump world. The shoes are pre-order only; just another Don-con: :

Facebooklinkedinrss

Republicans Duped By Russia

The Daily Escape:

After sunset, Clark Dry Lake, Anza-Borrego SP, CA – February 2024 photo by Paulette Donnellon

The case against Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden took a bad turn for Congressional Republicans who were alleging bribery by the two men, when a former FBI informant Alexander Smirnov, was found to be making false bribery claims and was arrested and charged by the DOJ. From NBC: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“A former FBI informant who allegedly fed the bureau false information about President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden during the 2020 presidential campaign said that some of the information…came from “officials associated with Russian intelligence,” prosecutors said in a filing Tuesday.”

More:

“Smirnov, according to prosecutors with special counsel David Weiss’ office, provided false derogatory information to the FBI about the Bidens, including the false allegation that officials with Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company that employed Hunter Biden, had paid the Bidens $5 million each…”

Those fabrications were widely promoted by Congressional Republicans who cited it as a justification for their effort to impeach Biden.

David Weiss, the Special Counsel heading the case against Hunter Biden, was the government’s lead prosecutor against Smirnov in Nevada, seeking to have Smirnov held without bail. But in what should have been an easy case, Weiss lost, and Smirnov is now free. That seems insane from a national security perspective.

Think about this: The Republicans’ main witness in their efforts to impeach Biden has been charged with lying to the FBI. He has also admitted to having ties to Russian intelligence, who fed him some of the information ultimately used by the Republicans. Previously, Reps James Comer (R-K ) and Jim Jordan (R-OH) said that Smirnov’s was the best evidence they had.

Last summer, Comer had threatened to hold the FBI in contempt, leading the Bureau to show members of the Oversight Committee a form that documented the statements Smirnov allegedly made to his FBI handler in 2020. Unfortunately for Comer and Jordan, the Bureau emphasized that the existence of the form did not mean the claims were vetted. Despite that warning, the GOP ran with the information. One Republican who viewed the form quickly proclaimed that Joe Biden was “100% guilty” of bribery.

This shows that these Republicans were duped and used as assets of Russian intelligence. Let’s connect the dots, first with this tweet by Radley Balko:

But think about the big picture:

  • These members of Congress initiated impeachment proceedings against a US President based on information passed to them by an agent of Russian intelligence.
  • These same members have refused to pass funding to aid Ukraine.
  • These same members refused to impeach Trump when he extorted Ukraine.
  • These same members tried to suggest it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 election.
  • And, these same members voted against certifying Biden’s 2020 election.

America’s democracy is in a terrible place if one of the two national political Parties is so easily turned into dupes for Russian intelligence simply because they aim to acquire more political power. Imagine if the GOP had been collaborating with the KGB during the Cuban Missile Crisis!

If the Republicans fail to own up to using Russia-supplied information and if they continue to use it,  we’ll see Putin get eastern Europe while America gets Christo-fascism.

It’s time for Congress, at a minimum, to question Comer and Jordan and others. It should be a time to censure them, along with other Republicans who relied on Alexander Smirnov to smear the Bidens. That includes Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), but Wrongo knows that will never happen.

Isn’t this continuing complicity between Russia, Trump, and the GOP a big hammer to hit Trump and the GOP with, in the fall?

Facebooklinkedinrss

Cartoons Of The Week

(The Wrongologist will not publish a Monday Wake Up Call column this week)

Last week ended with a New York judge handing Trump a crushing defeat in his civil fraud case, finding the former president liable for conspiring to manipulate his net worth and ordering him to pay a penalty of $355 million. In addition to the monetary penalty, Justice Engoron imposed a three-year ban preventing Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity for three years.

The verdict was civil, not criminal. That means Trump hasn’t yet been convicted of a crime, but he has been declared a fraud by the state of New York. He’s settled numerous fraud trials before this one, notably the Trump University case, in which he was barred from ever running another charity in New York after he defrauded little kids with cancer.

It’s the Democrats’ job to see that this stays in the forefront of the voters’ minds. When you’re barred from running a business in New York, how can Republicans make the case that you’re qualified to run the country? Or if you’re in debt bigly, wouldn’t it be tempting to take a few bribes? Or sell a few classified documents? On to cartoons.

Trump now has some thinking to do:

OTOH, he’s proving surprisingly difficult to kill:

The Kansas City Super Bowl parade becomes just another unsafe place:

The Ukraine city, Avdiivka fell on Friday because it didn’t receive ammo from the US on time:

Trump offers gift to Putin:

RIP Alexy Navalny:

Facebooklinkedinrss

The Mess That Is Congress

The Daily Escape:

Sunrise, Henry Driggers Park, Brunswick, GA – December 2023 photo by Kyle Morgan

“Dress me up for battle when all I want is peace
Those of us who pay the price come home with the least”

(from 1976’s “Harvest for the World”, by the Isley Brothers)

There are only 11 days left until Christmas, and there are only three more days this year when the Senate is in session, and just two days left for the House. That schedule could be amended and lengthened if both Houses can reach agreement on anything before they break this Friday.

Prime among the legislation that should/must pass is aid for Ukraine. And Ukraine’s president Zelenskyy’s in Washington to try to help turn a few politicians to help. From the WaPo:

“The visit — less than three months after Zelenskyy’s last trip to Washington — comes at a critical time for the supplemental appropriations bill….Republicans have demanded that the package include border policy changes, and some Democrats criticized the White House on Monday for being willing to give up too much in those negotiations after Biden said he was willing to agree to “significantly more” to strike a deal.”

Biden says he’s willing to deal, but Congress seems very likely to leave for the holidays without passing any new Ukraine package. From David Frum in The Atlantic:

“The ostensible reason is that they want more radical action on the border than the Biden administration has offered. The whole aid package is now stalled, with potentially catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. Ukrainian units are literally running out of ammunition.”

More:

“How is any of this happening? On past evidence, a clear majority of Senate Republicans sincerely want to help Ukraine. Probably about half of House Republicans do too. In a pair of procedural test votes in September, measures to cut or block aid to Ukraine drew, respectively, 104 and 117 Republican votes of the 221 (Republicans then) in the caucus.”

Biden’s offer to negotiate with Republicans about the border is meaningful. The fundamental reason for today’s border crisis is that would-be immigrants game the asylum system. The system is overwhelmed by the numbers claiming asylum. Most of those claims will ultimately be rejected, but the processing of each takes years. In the meantime, most asylum seekers will be released into the US.

Biden’s proposal is $14 billion of additional funding that would pay for 1,600 new staff in the asylum system. New hires can speed up the process, reducing the incentive for asylum claimants who get de facto US residency while their claim is pending.

But are Republicans willing to negotiate? It doesn’t seem like they are. The Republicans in the Senate’s  position is stated by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) who said:

“There’s a misunderstanding on the part of Senator Schumer….This is not a traditional negotiation, where we expect to come up with a bipartisan compromise on the border. This is a price that has to be paid in order to get the supplemental.”

This is 2023: For some Republicans, what matters isn’t what they get, but how they get it.

That’s also true in the House where Speaker Johnson (R-Bible) told Zelenskyy that the US southern border should come first in negotiations with Democrats over aid for Ukraine.

Clearly the Republican House members are in it to strike poses and television hits. They do not want to make deals. They each want to position themselves as the one true conservative too pure for dealmaking. The only things they’re willing to admit they want are the things they know to be impossible.

It’s a complicated situation, because House Republicans have one set of immigration demands while Republicans in the Senate refuse to say what their demands are.

This means Biden has to make a deal that Senate Democrats won’t want. Otherwise we’re headed to a “no” that will doom Ukraine and disgrace the US in the eyes of the world while doing nothing to remedy the crisis at the border.

If Congressional leadership was ever needed, it’s needed today.

Jon V. Last in the Bulwark lists the two real-world reasons for Biden to give in. First, that Ukraine is more important than our domestic immigration policy:

“The war is a finite event, the results of which will influence global economics and security for years and decades to come. Depending on the outcome, NATO will either congeal or fracture. Peace and security in Europe will either stabilize or destabilize. China will either be deterred or encouraged in its quest to subjugate Taiwan.”

Second, immigration is a perennial challenge for America. Even if we “solved” current immigration problems today, next year, we’d have more immigration problems to re-solve:

“Immigration does need reform. Huge sections of the system are broken, the humanitarian crisis at the border is real, and there are some areas where Democrats and Republicans have similar views of which reforms are needed.”

Jon Last also points out that there are good political reasons for Biden to make a deal. First, a deal makes Republicans co-owners of the border problem. For Republicans, immigration is like abortion: It’s not an issue they want to solve; it’s a political club they want to wield.

Second, Biden can paint Republicans as anti-Ukraine even after making an immigration deal. He can say that Republicans didn’t want to fund Ukraine (which polls well with voters) so he had to take action to make sure they didn’t hand Putin a victory.

Third, an immigration deal shores up Biden’s position with Hispanic and swing voters. Immigration is a very important issue to voters and large majorities of them disapprove of Biden’s immigration policies.

Fourth, Biden can then reinforce his 2024 narrative that the election is a choice between governing, or chaos. He’s going to try to disqualify Trump and make 2024 a contest between a workhorse who gets bipartisan compromises done and a chaos agent who burns everything down.

JV Last says:

“Cutting a deal on immigration in order to get aid to Ukraine lets Biden say (a) “I’m the guy who gets business done by doing bipartisan compromise,” but also (b) “If you don’t like this deal, Democratic voters, then we have to win back the House.”

Good thinking from Last.

Wrongo has generally steered clear of debates over immigration and the Wall because they have a high noise to signal ratio, and neither side is always great on the facts.

It’s curious: You would assume that all Republicans should be pounding on their Congressional representatives to increase the number of immigration judges immediately! But they aren’t since that would conflict with their idea of shrinking the administrative state. They shouldn’t be able to have it both ways.

One way to cut illegal immigration down would be to crack down on foreign remittances. Most immigrants are sending money back home to help the rest of their families survive. If remittances required an ID card that only citizens or those with a valid visa could obtain, remittances would fall.

All we can do now is hope for cooler heads to make a deal before year end.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Are Drones Replacing Artillery As “The King Of Battle”?

The Daily Escape:

First Snow, Cedar Breaks NM, UT – October 2023 photo by Dawn A. Flesher

America is all a-twitter over whether we are going to continue to fund Ukraine. The basic argument NOT to fund them going forward is how expensive it is, and how the money could be better used at home. Paul Krugman disputes this:

“In the 18 months after the Russian invasion, US aid totaled $77 billion. That may sound like a lot. It is a lot compared with the tiny sums we usually allocate to foreign aid. But total federal outlays are currently running at more than $6 trillion a year, or more than $9 trillion every 18 months, so Ukraine aid accounts for less than 1% of federal spending (and less than 0.3% of GDP. The military portion of that spending is equal to less than 5% of America’s defense budget.”

Wrongo isn’t saying that $77 billion is chump change. But if the MAGA types making the argument to spend it at home instead of in Ukraine would actually agree to increasing social spending with it, they’d have a solid argument. But that’s doubtful. It’s difficult to see them agreeing to spending anywhere near that level to improve the economic distress of America’s middle class and poor.

One thing that thinking about this expense highlights is just how expensive our military hardware has become. Take the F-35 fighter jet, which cost about $80,000,000 each. Air and Cosmos International reports that the maintenance costs for the F-35 are $42,000 per flight hour. And it’s reported that only about 26% of all F-35s are “available” at any point in time, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

It’s maybe an unfair comparison but think about how many drones Ukraine could purchase with one hour’s operating expense of one F-35, or with one of the bombs it carries, which cost about $500,000 each. One hour of F-35 operating expense equals about seven switchblade drones. The smallest Switchblade model fits in a backpack and flies directly into targets to detonate its small warhead. Each F-35 bomb’s cost is equivalent to around 90 drones.

America’s military strategy is based on air superiority, followed by massive bombing sorties and artillery fire. The big lesson in Ukraine is that piloted aircraft have been mostly irrelevant. Russia has many more and newer aircraft, and although they’ve bombed much of Ukraine, they haven’t gained an advantage as a result. Basically they’re using jets to launch missiles from positions beyond the range of Ukraine’s Stinger and Patriot missile systems.

Similarly, Russia’s navy hasn’t been decisive vs. Ukraine. Russia has the advantage at sea, while Ukraine’s ancient fleet is bottled up. But Ukraine is managing to ship (some) grain because the Russian navy is hiding from Ukraine’s cheap naval drones.

Ukraine isn’t breaking through Russia’s lines because its military, like Russia’s military, isn’t fit for the purpose. The artillery-based stalemate on the ground would favor Ukraine if it wasn’t for the in-depth layering of land mines by the Russians in the Ukrainian territory that the Ukies are trying to retake.

The days when Russia could advance into Ukraine under a screen of artillery fire, as they did during the first summer of the war, are over. Ukraine is the one advancing now. From Mark Sumner:

“Over the past several months, Russia tried to make advances at Svatove, quickly capturing a series of villages. That attack fizzled within days, and a week later Ukraine recaptured all the territory it had lost. Something similar happened at Kupyansk, where Russia was reportedly massing over 100,000 troops to drive Ukraine back across the Oskil River. Ukraine is still on the east side of the Oskil, and still in Kupyansk.”

At the moment, Ukraine appears capable of successfully capturing areas it targets and holding them against subsequent Russian assaults.

That’s not to say that the militaries built by the US, NATO, China and Russia are useless. Obviously, they have great value. But it’s clear how capital intensive warfare has become. Ukraine is showing us that there is an evolution in military tactics underway right in front of us.

In Ukraine, drones—both aerial and aquatic—have reached a critical mass. They are demonstrating widespread capabilities that make some traditional weapons systems take on more limited roles. And the immediate future in the Ukraine/Russian war will be drone warfare.

Any military in the world will become somewhat obsolete particularly in a land war, without a robust drone and anti-drone program. All are working feverishly to get there. Except perhaps for Turkey, who’s Bayraktar drones are already exported to both sides in the Russia-Ukraine war.

In Ukraine, drones have redefined the front lines. Before, we generally regarded the front line as the area where the infantry of both sides were engaged. But if soldiers with drones and a smart phone can project force sufficient to stop a tank 4-5 miles away, and then pick up another $1,000± drone and do it again a few minutes later, where’s the real front line?

This and more can be done with precision weapons like HIMARS at even greater ranges. But that requires more expense, more setup, and greater levels of support. There’s a vast logistical train behind a weapon like a mobile HIMARS launcher.

Going back to Napoleonic times, artillery has always been called “the king of battle”, because there’s no real defense against it once it’s firing. But this old artillery officer can tell you that it comes with those pesky logistics problems and much more expense and training.

In contrast, what’s needed to support a DJI quadcopter is in the hands of the operator. Early in the war, drones were performing roles that formerly were played by traditional aircraft. Now they’re also performing the roles of artillery and mortars. They are precision systems that deliver value at not just a lower price, but with fewer burdens of transport, maintenance, and training.

Like Ukraine, Russia has a lot to gain from drones since they bypass the two things that Russia does badly: logistics and training. You don’t need to get a million shells to the front lines if you can get a hundred thousand drones—and better than half of them will hit their target.

Drones can’t replace much more of the military equipment in the field, because the legacy equipment still has a big edge in both range and destructive power. But the cost-benefit ratio of drones is incredibly favorable. As battery technology continues to improve, the destructive power of drones will go up without significant incremental development cost.

What we’re seeing in Ukraine is the 2020s version of the asymmetric warfare that killed us in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Guerilla tactics on their home turf were more valuable than all of our expensive weapons systems.

And Russia is getting their ass kicked by the same kind of asymmetry in Ukraine today.

 

(Many thanks to Brendan K. for his input to this column)

Facebooklinkedinrss