Back in March of 2023, I questioned in the post “Out of the Jaws” whether Ukraine could ever win its war with the Russian invader without the ability to shoot back. Though the Ukrainians had halted the invasion, they could never win if they couldn’t hit back at the Russian war machine’s homeland infrastructure. While the Russians hammered every military or civilian target they could, the Biden administration allowed the use of U.S. weapons only close to the battlefield. Only in 2024, in response to Russia’s use of North Korean troops, did it slightly extend the range.

Russian territory was largely exempt. Biden reasoned it was best to limit the scope of the war. Fearing that hits on Moscow or St Petersburg like those on Kyiv, the Russians might use nuclear weapons or attack NATO nations. As unlikely as either of these Russian reactions is, the Biden Administration must have believed in them, as they slow-walked arms to Ukraine.

This policy led the Biden administration to push Ukraine into an ill-fated offensive without air superiority or the longer-range weapons Ukrainians had requested. Without the means to cut off supplies to the well-dug-in Russians, the attack was doomed before it even started.

The U.S. military doctrine says it must have air superiority before a major offensive, yet where were the F-16s the Ukrainians asked for?

Things didn’t improve under Trump. While keeping many of the range restrictions in place, his administration taunted Ukrainian President Zelensky, saying he had no cards and should give in to Russian demands. It never seemed to dawn on them that Ukraine might have cards, but the U.S. prevented them from playing them.

If Russians felt no pain at home, they had little reason to oppose the war. Yes, troops were maimed or dying, but drafted from rural areas, criminals, or recruited foreigners; the horror of war didn’t touch Russian elites. Life in Moscow or St. Petersburg went on as usual—some inflation, but nothing aimed at them.

Instead of folding, the brave Ukrainians fought on. The same imagination and ingenuity that stopped the initial massive Russian attack, the Ukrainians applied to the modern battlefield. High-tech is increasingly used to gain an edge, especially in the new drone warfare. Rapidly updating design, software, command, and tactics, allowing them to blunt the Russian manpower and equipment advantage.

If the U.S. wasn’t going to provide the longer-range weapons sorely needed to isolate the battlefield and attack Russia’s war infrastructure deep in that vast nation, Russia lacked any incentive to make peace. Yet, when asked, the U.S. turned down Ukraine’s request for Tomahawk long-range missiles.

It was left up to the Ukrainians to develop the weapons they needed. These freedom-loving people rose to the challenge, especially with long-range drones. Residents in Moscow and St. Petersburg find themselves treated to towering smoke plumes rising from their major oil facilities;

Continue reading →

John Thune is on the hot seat. Most Americans would ask, Who is that? He’s the Republican majority leader of the Senate, one of the most powerful positions in the U.S. He replaced the long-serving Mitch McConnell, the brilliant political strategist who dominated much of the Senate’s actions for decades. Thune is responsible for moving legislation and appointments through the Senate.

While he did yeoman work shepherding President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bil” through the Senate, he has thwarted the will of the Senate to please the President. Eighty-five members signed onto the Graham-Blumenthal Russian sanctions bill, yet the Republican leadership under Thune has not brought the legislation to the floor. After the failure of the Alaska summit to achieve a ceasefire due to Putin’s intransigence, it’s time to apply maximum pressure on Russia.

As I’ve pointed out, the Trump administration has been visibly tougher on Ukraine than Russia. The administration’s theory was to bring the latter to the negotiating table. Well, Trump met with Putin, and Putin came away with enhanced prestige while giving up nothing. The Russian attacks on civilians have intensified. If there was ever a time to deal Russia pain, it’s now.

What we are getting from the administration is, at best, mixed signals. Instead of blaming the continued fighting on Putin, the Trump administration holds both countries equally to blame. While acknowledging Russian attacks on civilians, Caroline Leavitt, the presidential press secretary, pointed out that Ukraine had taken out 20% of Russia’s fuel capacity. This equivalence is an apples-and-oranges comparison. Oil refineries and pipelines have always been legitimate war targets, while direct civilian targeting is a war crime.

Even stranger is the recent disclosure that Exxon is in talks with Russians regarding the development of Russian oil assets. Why would the largest American oil company be cleared to work with the Russians to increase output? Russia pays for this ugly war with oil sales. How is it in our interest to help Russia?

Continue reading →

In his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump claimed he would end the Ukraine war in 24 hours. He won, but the first 24 hours came and went with Ukrainian civilians still targeted and killed—no action taken against Russia. In February, President Trump and Vice President Vance bullied Zelenskyy in the Oval Office to consider what he would offer for a ceasefire. Ukrainian civilians are still being targeted and killed, and no U.S. action against Russia.

In July, Trump temporarily halted arms shipments to Ukraine. Later in the month, he gave Putin 50 days to agree to a ceasefire, which he then shortened to 10-12 days. Ukrainian civilians continued to be targeted and killed, with no U.S. action taken against Russia.

In early August, the U.S. agreed to sell a billion dollars of weapons to Europeans to give to Ukraine. President Trump arranged to meet Putin in Alaska on August 15th to negotiate a ceasefire. Putin being seen as a great national leader rather than an international pariah, forestalling any severe sanctions, while the war continues, underlay his attendance.

As the two Presidents returned home, it was clear that Trump had failed to secure a ceasefire, whereas Putin had achieved all his objectives. Ukrainian civilians continued to be targeted and killed, with no U.S. action taken against Russia.

Somewhere, Trump got the idea that Putin was open to a NATO-like force on the ground and in the air that would keep Ukraine safe, even if it gave Russia vital defensive territory. European leaders descended on Washington on Monday to discuss the details of the peacekeeping force and to praise Trump.

Russia claims it went into Ukraine to prevent Western troops stationed on its borders, so it’s fanciful to believe it is suddenly OK now. Then all the attendees went home. Ukrainian civilians continued to be targeted and killed, with no U.S. action taken against Russia.

Now that a few days have elapsed, it’s clear Russia agreed to nothing, saying that Ukraine’s guarantors should include Russia and China, each with a veto. Any further meeting, either between Putin and Zelenskyy or one that also includes Trump, would require extensive prior groundwork. Ukrainian civilians continued to be targeted and killed, with no action taken against Russia.

Continue reading →

The Russian summer offensive in Ukraine is in full swing. Heavy attacks along the front lines join heavy drone and missile attacks pounding that valiant nation. It stands to reason that the US and its NATO allies are rushing all the help they can. On Monday, we were surprised to find this isn’t the case. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the US is not only not increasing its support, but is also holding up already approved armaments, some of which are already in Poland.

With all the attention focused on the President’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” this situation is being overlooked. It shouldn’t be. Russian control of Ukraine brings it right up to NATO’s borders. Unless we withdraw from the organization, a Russian attack on a NATO nation will directly involve us. Why would anybody want that? Right now, we only have to provide material support to fend off Russian aggression. An attack on a NATO nation means Americans are in harm’s way. Whatever we’ve spent supporting Ukraine is cheap compared to direct conflict.

This action is the second time the Trump administration has halted arms to Ukraine. Last March, we halted shipments while the Russians were pounding Ukraine, including civilians, to pressure that nation to agree to a ceasefire. They agreed and are still open to the idea.

Russia has agreed to nothing except some prisoner exchanges. Yet the administration has refrained from exerting any real pressure on Putin. Why are we putting more pressure on Ukraine in the middle of a battle, when they’re not the holdup?

Elbridge Colby, the Defense Department undersecretary for policy, appears to be the point person on the arms pause. The excuse given is low stockpiles. What an odd reason. The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East didn’t start yesterday; they’ve been going on for a long time. If we hadn’t ramped up production, it would be our mistake—Produce more rather than taking the bullets out of our friends’ guns. Some are questioning whether the stockpiles are, in fact, low.

Continue reading →