40 Comments
User's avatar
G1 Tim's avatar

"Its going to be Afghanistan deja-vu all over again" and Trump is going to own it, when he didn't have to. He is fighting serious reaguard action back home on many serious lawfare, deep-state pushback, and a critical level of debt and the exhaustion of a mumti year bull run in equities. His pressing requirement must be to shut down Ukraine pronto and restart trade relations with Russia and cut deals with China diplomatically, not heavy handedly. If Europe want be lemmings or gimps, then abuse them as its what they need, and they will crack. Above all, tell Netanyahoo to fck off, and start trying to repair relations with the rest of the world. America needs a big plan for its infrastructure and training up of tooling and factory skills.

But none of the above is happening precisely because he won't tell the fckr to fck off, so he won't get a Nobel peace prize for that and stopping UkrNatSocs War, and instead of getting the young people to love him for this, he is labelling them anti-Semitic, shutting down protests and deporting innocent students.

W h a t a w a s t e...!

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

The self-delusion is still off the channels in DC: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/04/putin_in_the_crosshairs.html

Expand full comment
johnycomelately's avatar

Seems like the US doesn’t have the ISR assets to conduct both conflicts simultaneously.

The Russians might not be gun shy taking out European planes directing drones.

Expand full comment
Stephen McIntyre's avatar

Has the lightbulb finally gone on for Trump? Does he now realize he doesn’t hold any cards here it’s the Russians.

I just saw today where the so-called minerals deal has fallen apart. What a surprise. That was never going to be reality in my opinion. Another sideshow by Trump.

I am not surprised whatsoever, the heavy involvement of the United States and NATO with Ukraine .

They did everything but the one crucial important thing which was to put in a ground army of about 250 to 300,000 men at a minimum. in fact, I would say they probably needed military personnel in the range of 500,000 to get the job done if that’s indeed what they wanted to do.

But we don’t have those resources we would be lucky to field 150,000 people I have read that we might be able to supply them in the field for 6 to 8 weeks. we have squandered, precious munitions, and resources for Ukraine that we have not been able to replace. We do not have the resources to fight anywhere.

We don’t even have the resources to invade Yemen and defeat the Houthi. As usual Trump is making statements. He cannot back up and now reality possibly is hitting him and his advisors.

Of course we haven’t even address. What is he going to do in the Middle East? Are we still set on trying to bomb Iran into the Stone Age? There again that won’t work either you’d have to put a army on the ground and a large one if that which again we don’t have.. what’s going to happen when we run out of arms to supply Israel with?

Since we don’t have the manufacturing base we had during World War II or even the first gulf war, how long is it going to take to replenish all of our munitions? Answer probably years and look how far behind and missile technology and kinetic energy bomb technologies we are compared to the Russians they’ve got superiority in a lot of areas. we have to face the fact that our military is now about second rate and I’m probably being kind at that.

So when Trump does his mea culpa on Ukraine how will he spin it to make it look like it was a win or a draw?

Expand full comment
Cosmo T Kat's avatar

This is not about rearming this is all about theft and corruption. Sure give more money to Ukraine, double that and send it to Israel. Who benefits? We know who and it’s not us.

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

The only "winning" strategy for Trump and the US is what he momentarily tried: stop all arms shipments and intel feeds and push Z to make peace. When Z refuses, as he will until he is kicked out, then Trump can at least say that he tried. I can already see the Dems going into the midterms with the "Trump's war" campaigning slogan.

Expand full comment
Cosmo T Kat's avatar

How quickly did he resume aid and why? I think we all know the answer, but most Americans do not.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Re the so-called rare earth deal, I agree entirely with Zelensky's view (!). Which is, he refuses to recognize US war aid as an indebtedness for Ukraine. Why should Ukraine owe the US a dime? They've paid many time over in blood and suffering. Trump's position is obscene.

Expand full comment
Cosmo T Kat's avatar

Good point. I am beginning to think there is no way out of this never ending quagmire. TPTB can never get enough. The bankers need a reset. They are way over leveredged and they need a major conflict that makes it necessary to confiscate assets and bank accounts to save Israel from anti semitism. You know it’s a world problem now, but we can’t ask why.

Expand full comment
dissonant1's avatar

From the cited LJ - Judge Nap video: "It is illegal for anyone from the Ukrainian government to talk to the Russians." This is currently Ukrainian law. And yet Trump is upset that Putin won't talk to Zelensky and that Putin wants new elections in Ukraine. So the judgement goes one way but not the other? Either Trump is not aware of the Ukrainian law (has foreign policy advisors who are ignorant and are advising him from incomplete information) or he is choosing to ignore their educated advice and the reality of the current situation. Either way, not good. Not good at all.

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Matt Taibbi (at his best) just came out with an article on this in his "Racket" substack site titled "Biden Lied About Everything..."

A brief excerpt:

"The piece is also an extraordinarily comprehensive betrayal of Zelensky and Ukraine, exponentially worse than the “dressing down” by Trump. Authored by longtime veteran of controversial intel pieces Adam Entous, it’s sourced to 300 American and European officials who seem to be responding to their apparent sidelining via a shameless tantrum, exhibiting behavior that in the field would get military men shot. Not only do they play kiss and tell with a trove of operational secrets, they use the Times to deflect blame from their own failures onto erstwhile Slavic partners, cast as ignorant savages who snatched defeat from the jaws of America-designed victory. It’s as morally abhorrent a piece of ass-covering ever as I’ve seen in print, and that somehow is not its worst quality."

Expand full comment
ML's avatar

Sub-zero accountability

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Very enjoyable.

Expand full comment
Richard Mazon's avatar

Isn't this NYT article a classic "limited hang out?"

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

Yep

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Yes. Why I don't subscribe.

Expand full comment
SMH's avatar

With apologies to Harry S. Truman, anyone with even minimal brain function has to know that this article in the NYT is pure, undiluted bullshit. I sincerely hope that someone in the Trump administration will call them out on this wholesale whitewash! I’m also hoping that the “sources” who helped perpetuate this exercise in fantasy have been fired from the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies. If Trump and his people don’t start permanently cleaning out the neocon debris, this crap will never stop.

BTW, why does Alexander Vindman still have a job?

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

rt.com/news/615056-nyt-us-ukraine-expose/

Here’s why the West has so far failed to start World War III

The New York Times “exposé” on the US-Ukraine partnership contains no surprises, but the underlying revelation is stunning

Once you see through the rather silly group-therapy jargon of a tragic erosion of “trust” and sad misunderstandings, it is the Ukrainians that get the blame for the US not winning its war against Russia, in their country and over their dead bodies.

Because one fundamental conceit of “The Partnership” is that the war could have been won by the West, through Ukraine. What seems to never even have entered the author’s mind is the simple fact that this was always an absurd undertaking. Accordingly, the other thing that hardly makes it onto his radar screen is the crucial importance of Russia’s political and military actions and reactions.

This, hence, is an article that, in effect, explains losing a war against Russia without ever noticing that this may have happened because the Russians were winning it. In that sense, it stands in a long tradition: Regarding Napoleon’s failed campaign of 1812 and Hitler’s crash between 1941 and 1945, all too many contemporary and later Western observers have made the same mistake: For them it’s always the weather, the roads (or their absence), the timing, and the mistakes of Russia’s opponents. Yet it’s never – the Russians. This reflects old, persistent, and massive prejudices about Russia that the West cannot let go of.

Expand full comment
TedTheKitty's avatar

As usual, it just goes to show that the only thing A-Z types care about is saving face; their plans are always predicated on the enormous A-Z ego, which is why their plans always fail. "It would have worked, if everybody else wasn't so STUPID!"

After 3 years, these yahoos still have NO idea how the Russians think or how they prosecute war - therefore they have no idea how to defeat them. Turns out viewing your opponent through the lens of bigoted stereotypes is not all that helpful. But the Russians certainly understand the west.

I just watched The Duran and they did a very good breakdown of the article, too.

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

I too watched the Duran video today and agree.

Expand full comment
Retired FL LEO's avatar

I saw LJs one line analysis about 20 minutes after reading the main piece. I wish I had seen it first and saved all that wasted time.

Expand full comment
ML's avatar

HA!

Expand full comment
dpy's avatar

All of the gross delusional miscalculation would be comical if not for the million dead soldiers.

And loss of prestige and accountability.

The trillion dollars of squandered assets.

And my several 10s of thousands of dollars of frozen and now delisted Polyus stock (Russian gold mining co that pays GREAT dividends) and Franklin RUS Russia etf.

Does this all feel like the death throes of a mis-directed Empire?

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Hold tight for Ukrainian minerals in our collective future!

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

My life does feel rather empty, Cardi, without that dash of manganese and beryllium.

Expand full comment
Joe Katzman's avatar

He cleans them. Or they clean him, and usher in the same full-bore tyranny and invasion we’re seeing in Europe.

“Cleaning the Augean stables of the US NatSec establishment—and especially the Intel Community—is the task that he urgently needs to address without delay”

Expand full comment
ML's avatar

That should include firing Walz, but it won’t.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Exactly. It's existential.

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

Well, at least Musk is paying the CIA a visit today.

Expand full comment
Steghorn21's avatar

Totally. It's already disturbing that this is not being done. Every other government agency is being hit, but not the intelligence apparatus.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

Big Serge @witte_sergei

The New York Times thinks it’s “breaking news” that the Pentagon has been running all the operations planning, ISR, communications, and strike targeting for the Ukrainians. Everyone following along has known this since the summer of 2022.

This is why the snark about how “Russia can’t even defeat Ukraine” is so nonsensical. Ukraine would have been defeated long ago without the United States. This war is much more than an ordinary proxy conflict.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

3 minute video:

How Biden risked Nuclear War w/Russia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZYl2Jsp3Xs

Expand full comment
Ray-SoCa's avatar

Cassander’s and Mark’s analysis makes a lot of sense.

I am wondering why the article, and who supplied the information.

As Simplicus commented, there are no huge revelations in the article for people following the war, especially readers of this blog.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/secret-history-bombshell-nyt-report?

Why the article:

1. Make Biden era leadership / neocons look better

2. Make Zelensky a scapegoat as Ukraine deteriorates

3. Blow up Trump negotiations with Russia.

Stuff to consider is what was left out of the article. Cassander listed some, I would add Minske and Istanbul agreements. As well as hyping of Russia threat to justify censorship in Eu.

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Matt Taibbi's article. It's paywalled but will be available as a weekly summary non-paywalled on Sunday upcoming. https://www.racket.news/p/biden-lied-about-everything-including

Expand full comment
Ray-SoCa's avatar

Amazing quote!

“It’s as morally abhorrent a piece of ass-covering ever as I’ve seen in print, and that somehow is not its worst quality.”

Expand full comment