russia

Trump Returns To Yesteryear

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

The recent call between Trump and Putin confirms the U.S. president’s pro-Putin stance, as outlined in my “What is Trump Thinking” post. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Zelinski agreed to a complete ceasefire. Russian President Putin agreed to a ceasefire only on energy sites and some U.S.-Russia hockey games. Zeroing in on only energy is a giveaway of where Putin is feeling the pain. Ukraine has developed its long-range capabilities, enabling it to hit oil and gas facilities in Russia. Diminished oil shipments reduce Russia’s ability to stay afloat.

Remember, for most of Biden’s term, Ukraine was forbidden from using U.S. weapons deep in Russia, while Putin was free to hit anything anywhere in Ukraine. I and others recommend letting Ukraine return fire anywhere in Russia launched attacks or war necessities produced. If Russia felt the pain, it would change its tune. Putin’s counter-proposal proves us correct.

Suppose Trump is serious about preserving Ukraine’s independence. In that case, he should’ve told Putin he either made real concessions or would supply Ukraine with everything it needs to put Russia in a world of pain. He didn’t, showing he favors Putin.

In the post, I pointed out Trump’s position was unworkable. Russia can’t break with China. Turning his back on Europe to cuddle up with Putin makes no sense.

Continue reading →

There Is A Great Deal of Ruin In A Nation

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized , , , ,

Adam Smith argued, “There is a Great Deal of Ruin in a Nation,” acknowledging that our political leaders must do a lot of bungling to bring down a powerful and prosperous country. Given the administrations we’ve had since the turn of the century, I wonder if we are about to find out just how much ruin we can take before the fall.

Rather than following his father’s example, George W. Bush invaded and conquered Iraq. After crushing Iraq’s military in Kuwait, George H.W. Bush refused to invade that nation to get rid of Saddam Hussain. The elder Bush realized this would upset the balance of power in the Mideast. Getting rid of one bloodthirsty leader would only empower the murderous mullahs in Iran at a significant cost to us. The younger Bush went ahead anyway with dire results.

Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11, so why focus our efforts on him? Afghanistan harbored the organization carrying out the attacks, which needed our attention so it wouldn’t happen again.

On the domestic front, the younger Bush administration was asleep at the switch while the housing crisis brought us the “Great Recession.” Others warned that the combination of cheap money and sub-par lending is combustible, but the powers ignored the signs.

Continue reading →

Neville Trump

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

If Trump’s goal in opening peace talks with Putin is to end the current Ukraine war and ensure Russia doesn’t begin a new chapter a few years down the road, he has a strange way of going about it. Instead of presenting Putin with a list of actions the U.S. will take unless Russia agrees to workable guarantees of Ukraine’s borders, Trump’s Secretay of Defence announced NATO membership for Ukraine is off the table. Then, his Vice President infers the right-of-center German Christian Democrats should hook up with the pro-Russian Alternative for Germany (Afd).

If this wasn’t bad enough, Trump chose to denigrate Ukraine’s President as a Dictator responsible for the continuing war. Trump demands President Zelinsky hold an election. According to Trump, he has little support in Ukraine. (The latest poll has Zellinsky’s popularity at 57%),

Trump proposed that Ukraine pledge its natural resources for U.S. development to secure any more U.S. aid, and no U.S. forces will ever be involved in maintaining Ukraine’s borders. What is strange is that many of the resources are in the Russian-occupied part of Ukraine,

Putin must be dancing a jig over his good fortune. He can visualize sharing a Nobel Peace Prize with Trump while waiting to devour the rest of Ukraine for dessert. He doesn’t have to give up a thing.

What caused Trump to denounce the Ukrainian President? He dared complain about his exclusion from the talks that would decide his nation’s fate. One of the few remaining columnists, George Will, whose first memories were of World War II, reminds us of a similar circumstance on the road to that horrible war. The leaders of Great Britain, France, Italy, and Germany gathered in Munich to decide the fate of Czechoslovakia. The one excluded was the leader of that nation.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain claimed the agreement reached there promised “Peace in our Time.” Seven months later, Germany completed the takeover of the doomed nation. History gives Zelinsky every reason to object to Trump and Putin deciding the life or death of his country. Trump even excluded friendly European nations from the talks. The U.S. President’s anti-involvement stance echoes Chamberlain’s observation about “a quarrel in a faraway land between people of which we know nothing.”

Continue reading →

Donald the Great?

Dave Davis Policy, The Long Journey to "More", The Middle East, Uncategorized , , , ,

Having already written about some things to look for in the New Year, I’d like to take a new approach. Donald Trump’s talk about making Canafda the 51st state, buying Greenland, and repossessing the Panama Canal caused me to think of how leaders who see themselves as bigger than life seem focused on the past rather than charting a future that benefits those they lead.

Our major adversaries, Russia, Iran, and China, are centered on recreating old empires. Turkey may be poised to join this group. Putin in Russia regrets the loss of the Empire, created through centuries of Russian expansion culminating in the vast Soviet Empire, which collapsed under Cold War pressure. Setting up stooges in some adjoining territories and continuing to attack Ukraine, the Russian strongman is expending blood and treasure on a grand scale to reestablish the Empire.

The Histories of Empires from the Persian through the Sasanian, centered in Iran, fuel the Mullahs’ desire to widen their reach across the Middle East. They may, as Shites, even see themselves as rightful ones to bring back the Moslem Empire of the early caliphs.

No nation has a more extended History of Empire than China, going at least back to the Shang Dynasty (221 B.C.). Before the communists, the Ming Dynasty (1368 to 1644) was the last to attempt expansion, sending fleets and armies to gain control of both the land and maritime Silk Roads. However, reversals such as the Tummu crisis caused China to look inward. While Chinese fleets reached the east coast of Africa in the 15th century, they never rounded the Cape of Good Hope. Later in the century, the Portuguese did, and the direction of the history of the world changed. I covered this outcome in my “The 15th Century Came and nothing would ever be the same” post in “The Long Journey to More” series.

Xi Jinping seems intent on succeeding where the Ming Dynasty failed. His Belt & Road Initiative intends to recreate the land and maritime Silk Roads under Chinese control.

Continue reading →

Year-End Roundup ’23

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

It’s time to look back at ’23, which isn’t the best chore. My ideas were either ignored or only partially attempted. Russia’s Ukraine ’22 invasion not only fizzled but forced them to relinquish territory. Everyone was looking forward to the Ukrainian Summer Offensive to yield solid results, forcing the Russians to retreat. Meanwhile, pragmatists such as myself recommended right from the start training for and transferring aircraft to deny Russia any control of the air. Long-range weapons to strike bases and staging areas the Russians used to batter Ukrainian troops, civilians, and infrastructure are essential for success.

The summer offensive started without these necessities—no F16s or our old Warthogs, which might’ve given close air support. The Brits finally gave some long-range missiles, but only when the offense failed to make an early breakthrough. Imagine a U.S. attack on a well-dug-in enemy without air superiority and close support. In our Iraq wars, long-range missiles reached far beyond the battlefield to isolate. 

Yet, our military leaders expected breakthroughs and told everyone that the Ukrainians’ lack of significant success was a failure to follow their advice. Why would anyone follow Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, and their minions? Their only military action of note is the disastrous Afgan withdrawal. Sacking the whole bunch in any other military is expected for less. Instead of making sure to the best of their ability, the brave Ukrainians had what they needed to succeed; they urged them forward when they had little chance of a breakthrough. 

Continue reading →