Briefly Noted: Military And Geopolitical Reads

I’ll keep this brief, since this is Thanksgiving.

I came across two articles (h/t Andrei Martyanov) that illustrate the fix the US finds itself in from a military—and therefore geopolitical—standpoint. The fix arises from the simple fact that the US geopolitical strategy since WW2 has sought to bind to us allies that are distant from the US but extremely close to the foreign powers we seek to defeat. I use that word “defeat” by choice. My view is that US geopolitical strategy is intended to attain and maintain a unipolar world, with the US as global hegemon. That means that Russia and China must be kept down—defeated at every attempt to attain some sort of parity, even if that parity is economic in nature. Military power, especially in the modern world, is ultimately based on economic power. The US, therefore seeks to project its power across wide oceans and to use proxy nations to box in and threaten both Russia and China.

Until the 21st century the US was largely successful in this strategy, to the point that we had “thinkers” writing acclained books about the end of history. Delusional and hubristic, of course, but that’s the sort of triumphalist attitude the US has projected to the rest of the world. Currently, in a big picture sense, the US is engaged in war with Russia (and, to a lesser degree, China) in its effort to maintain and even extend its grip over Europe. But economic and military realities have changed the balance and put into doubt the US ability to prevail. The ultimate economic, of course, is now front and center: energy. The US is discovering that the only way to prevent Europe from being energy dependent on Russia is … to deindustrialize much of Europe, without being able to offer any viable energy alternative. The US, like Europe, is in thrall to a radical and unrealistic Neo-Malthusian ideology that dictates shutting down cheap and available sources of energy for a totally speculative “renewable” future.

Leaving that aside, the military aspect is discussed in these two articles:

The Sneaky Way China Could Win a War Against America

This article focuses on logistics. China can win a war by attacking our logistics and supply chain. “But logistics isn’t just important; it’s central.”

Kill the Logistics Fleet: The U.S. armed forces can accomplish little in the Western Pacific without ample and regular supplies of all types, from fuel to ammunition to foodstuffs. Prospective foes—read China—know this. They will go after the logistics fleet hauling matériel to the fighting forces, making it a priority target set.

And why not? That’s what I would do were I in charge of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Deprive hostile forces of what they need to accomplish their combat missions and you may as well have defeated them in a decisive battle. They slink away when they run out of supplies.

Of course the Neocons know this. That’s why they obsessively bring up the topic of Nukes. The US is simply not in a position to wage high intensity conventional war at trans-oceanic distances. Nukes are the equalizer for the US, but even that equalizer is precarious at this point, thanks to hypersonic missiles.

The next article features a special focus on submarine warfare but also covers much of our trans-oceanic force protection strategy. It pays no attention to the nuclear aspect. Instead it assumes the US is seeking to maintain its ability to securely ship vast quantities of equipment to Europe in the event of war with Russia—that can only be done by ship, in the quantities that would be needed. The bottom line here is the same as in the Pacific: high precision and high speed strike missiles have fundamentally altered all previous equations. The result has been, over the years in which the US has been engaged in a submarine arms race with Russia, that the US strategy has become ever more aggressive and provocative. Europe is distant from America, but—willy nilly—Russia is part of Europe. Russia doesn’t need to reach out militarily toward America in a threatening way in anything remotely like the way the US reaches out toward Russia.

As you’ll read, you’ll see the author’s basic assumption is that Russia is seeking to destroy the US. But a closer reading may suggest that much of Russia’s military development appears to have come in response to US efforts to maintain a booted foot on Russia’s neck—each Russia advance appears to follow a heightened US threat. Ever since the Cold War the US has proclaimed Russia to be an enemy and has aggressively sought to isolate and box Russia in—tightening a military and economic noose around Russia with the avowed goal of “dismembering” the Russian Federation. And, after all, the US is probably driven to escalate in a technological sense because technical supremacy is probably the only way for the US to prevent Europe from gravitating toward Russia out of sheer economic necessity. The Russian response has been entirely predictable in the face of such naked aggression. It’s a dangerous game, and the cards may well be stacked again the Neocon obsession with destroying Russia rather than coming to some modus vivendi.

(Un)Mind the Gap

The GIUK Gap was a vital antisubmarine warfare chokepoint during the Cold War, but countering the Russian undersea challenge today requires integrated, open-ocean capabilities.

On the NATO and European Unity front:

French Interior Minister Labels Italy An "Enemy" Of France After Migration Row

Finally, and a bit off topic, did it ever occur to you that there’s something eerily similar to the Branch Covidian cult of mRNA injections and the Lee Harvey Oswald dunnit theory of the JFK assassination? Consider:

JFK Assassination: 59 Years Of Lies Still Haven't Buried The Truth

In opinion polls going back to November 29th 1963, just a week after the shooting, at least a sixty-percent majority has rejected the official line every single time.

In short, regarding JFK, the “crazy conspiracy theorists” make up two-thirds of the population, and always have done.

This is a good thing. A victory for truth in the face of stark odds, overcoming fifty-nine years of propaganda.

It doesn’t matter what you think of JFK the man – whether you believe he was trying to change things, or hail from the Chomsky school of “he was just like Obama” – the simple facts reflect he was killed by state agencies of his own government.

It was a coup.

We don’t need to go into the details, it has been endlessly written about, on this site and a million others.

Suffice it to say, nothing about the “official story” has ever made sense. You have to leave rationality behind to believe it.

Much like mask-usage and the “safe and effective” vaccines during the “pandemic”, embracing the mainstream story of the “lone gunman” and his “magic bullet” has passed beyond the realm of thoughts and opinions and become a tenet of a modern-day religion.

Blaming Lee Harvey Oswald is now an oath of fealty, a show of faith. A sign you are one of the initiated – the first and most debased commandment in the book of State Orthodoxy.

Question it, and you question everything. Pull on that thread and six decades of carefully crafted narratives unravel in minutes.

I can’t tell you who did it, but I don’t think the government has come clean on who did it, either. This is another of those, “If only Trump had” things. Perhaps he thought he’d be assassinated, too.