Morally, we owe Ukraine as a part of the negotiations in removing the nuclear weapons from the country. We gave assurances I understand. They gave up their nukes; arguably, had they retained them, this situation would not exist as it does.

As a practical matter? Several equations are in play and pretty much immutable.

- Like Hitler and the Sudetenland, Putin will assure the world that once he gets Ukraine, he's done with aggression. He just wants that one little piece to insulate Russia.

- Like Hitler, it's a foregone conclusion that he already has the power and ability to walk into Ukraine. Sure, some pain and maybe some partisan attacks, but we have seen playbooks on how to manage that. Putin has read them.

- As a practical matter, there is no credible force that can move in from the west to counter. The moment troops started moving, he will just jump off and have things wrapped up.

- We don't have the 3 months it would take to get our worn equipment, bedraggled troops, rusty ships into place as a legitimate counter. Were we to do so, we would merely be closing the barn door after...... And Putin knows that we would tire of being on a war posture and leave after a while anyway.

- You mentioned elsewhere this conflict and Xi/Taiwan. I'll toss in Un/ROK as well. All three go at the same time or in close proximity and the forces we have? (Or, more accurately, the ability to transport the forces we have?) That trifecta would lead to paralysis here. Each would only want one piece of ground and state that they have no further interest. Hard to get much national sentiment up to go fight on foreign shores in that case. We might inflict some pain on DPRK, but with all three conflicts... we aren't able to respond to all of them. Maybe some response to ROK, but again, we don't have what it takes to do a sustained campaign.

You are right. We own this administration and we own the situation(s) as they stand.

And, we own the impotency we have created for ourselves as a result. I wish I could be more optimistic. But I'm just not seeing it...


Expand full comment

And the assurances that were given to Russia that NATO would not expand eastward?

Document 05

Memorandum of conversation between Mikhail Gorbachev and James Baker in Moscow.

Feb 9, 1990


U.S. Department of State, FOIA 199504567 (National Security Archive Flashpoints Collection, Box 38)

Even with (unjustified) redactions by U.S. classification officers, this American transcript of perhaps the most famous U.S. assurance to the Soviets on NATO expansion confirms the Soviet transcript of the same conversation. Repeating what Bush said at the Malta summit in December 1989, Baker tells Gorbachev: “The President and I have made clear that we seek no unilateral advantage in this process” of inevitable German unification. Baker goes on to say, “We understand the need for assurances to the countries in the East. If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” Later in the conversation, Baker poses the same position as a question, “would you prefer a united Germany outside of NATO that is independent and has no US forces or would you prefer a united Germany with ties to NATO and assurances that there would be no extension of NATO’s current jurisdiction eastward?” The declassifiers of this memcon actually redacted Gorbachev’s response that indeed such an expansion would be “unacceptable” – but Baker’s letter to Kohl the next day, published in 1998 by the Germans, gives the quote.

Expand full comment

Always great to hear from a double naught spy.....

Well THAT assurance went out the window a long time ago. In a number of stages. I've no justification for that lapse, or series of lapses. I would hazard a guess that the US did not vote no on the admittance of any country or block of countries.

Cause and effect? Because of the addition of former Warsaw Pact countries to NATO, is Putin reacting and attempting a barrier? Is he trying to get the band back together and re-Sovietize the area? Is there past glory and power he seeks to regain and revel in?

I don't know. Above my paygrade. I was just a guy that kept Tomcats flying and worked Repair Lockers in case of attack.

I also consider part of my role as advocacy for those serving today. Those who don't really have a voice. Much like CDR does. There may have been people who watched and thought about policy that balanced the US strategic and defense needs, the Nation's priorities and the people who had to enact the policies and measures NCA ordered. I don't know. I hope there was.

That said, I remain committed to viewing, commenting, pushing and advocating for those things which I consider worthy of action, and admonishments on those things I think are unnecessary or mistakes. I'm often wrong, but I am rarely silent.

A great part of my concern goes to those folks who are face down in the mud with rifles, who drill General Quarters constantly, who fly above delivering ass and trash, and all who live a miserable existence in defense of Country, Signatory Pacts, and the free world. Sure... there are times they must do what they must. And endure.

But.... There are also times where they may be staged in a show of force that is perhaps not needed. Ukraine reportedly has some concerns about our saber rattling. Germany as well. For some reason, the Canadians are bloodthirsty and out to join the Commonwealth to teach those Commies a lesson or two.....

May I ask, Mr. Bodine.... what path forward you would like to see?

Expand full comment

Hey Mr. sub-par paygrade. How do you think we would feel with batteries of "defensive" missiles, squadrons of military aircraft, and rotating "hostile" divisions positioned along our northern and southern borders, and missile cruisers and submarines sailing around the Gulf of Mexico and both coasts after being promised the spaces would not be militarized? A promise is a promise...and the US don't care whether it is written or verbal; we abrogate at will cuz it's the rules based order and we makes 'dem rules baby! "Defensive" NATO forces were "defending" the EU in Syria, Iraq, Africa, Afghanistan and Libya maybe? They sure were up to their necks in the "defensive" fragmentation of Yugoslavia in their own backyard!

Expand full comment

"WE" didn't vote for this, in so many ways. Ship the rapid reaction Light Infantry Divisions, 101st, 82nd, send troopers to mate up with prepositioned armor and move them, and start shipping ground forces. Get the air bases hardened in NATO and move dependents. Putin will stop.

Expand full comment

Putin moves he loses Kaliningrad aka East Prussia which is part of Germany or should be.

Expand full comment
Jan 25, 2022·edited Jan 25, 2022

The EU countries (plus Britain) have 4 times the population and 10 times the GDP of Russia. If they are unable to defend themselves (and Ukraine) from Russia, that is their choice.

The USA should not be spending blood and treasure on defending those who chose not to defend themselves.

Expand full comment

Russia will not invade them, just eh Ukraine. Yes Europeans are trash for not mounting a more vigorous defense of the Continent. Surrender monkeys all.

Expand full comment

If nothing else, the US shouldn't offer to be the prime/only/first line of defense... I'll agree to that... And still look to 2014 to see that Putin, who has surrounded 3 sides of UKR, is going to take that piece of land at his discretion.

Therefore. The strategic moves that SHOULD be at play here isn't reactionary actions for the current situation, but solid planning and strategy to prevent the next down the road. My opinion.

Don't remember where I saw them, but there have been a few pictures lately of German nighttime oaths... German soldiers appearing to mimic the Seig Heil salute. Am now starting to wonder if that isn't psyops by Russia to poison that well. Or create a reaction amongst the populations of Mother Russia..

Expand full comment

Russians play their opponents, not their cards. Euro-American Fascists (WEF, CIA) play their cards, not their opponents. Russians win any war that occurs between them and Euro-American Fascists.

FWIW: Here's what I think: I think right now, today, Putin and Lavrov are fiddling cards to observe responses by Euro-American Fascists. They know their opponent is Fascist and Euro-American. They know they can beat this opponent. They hold now several significant advantages. They know their opponent is hugely unpopular among their own subjects. They know their opponent -- Euro-American Fascists -- see what they want to be happening rather than what is happening. They know that this habit of mind, mixed with their high domestic disapproval, makes Euro-American Fascists weak into battle, terminally stupid, and wasteful of assets.

Or, to change the metaphor but not the meaning:

Penguins are known to dance on the edge of an ice floe, pretending to dive in, but not actually doing it, just so one or more of their fellow dancers will dive in first to console the seal they all know lurks below. If Putin and Lavrov are first to dive in shooting, they chance Americans and Europeans succumbing to CIA IO appealing to their martial spirits, as has happened to CDRSalamander. If they can tease Euro-American Fascists and Ukrainians into being first to dive in shooting, they are assured an American and European rise against the terminal stupidity of Euro-American Fascists, to hasten their removal from affairs of state.

Russians, Putin, and Lavrov see themselves as successors to Ivan, Peter, and Catherine, not Lenin, Stalin, and Brezhnev. They are after Constantinople, at least the Western Side, not Kiev. I think Americans should help Russians achieve that centuries-old objective of theirs.

Expand full comment

You and thought/thinking, what a novel concept alas you're incapable in reality.

Expand full comment
Jan 26, 2022·edited Jan 26, 2022

I wish people would stop begging the Germans to launch a massive rearmament. If the U.S. pulls out ot Europe, Germany will become a superpower. The Germans are very anti-American, despite what we've done for them since 1945. A German EU, or whatever succeeds it, with stealth bombers and nuclear weapons and a huge economy. And with Britain and the U.S. hobbled by diversity/wokeism. Think about it.

Expand full comment
Jan 27, 2022·edited Jan 27, 2022

"Ukraine is not our ally, but she borders many good allies. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Romania." Check a map lately much? Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Poland, Belarus, and Russia are border states. The Balric states are north of Poland and thus are far from being border states.

Supporting the most corrupt regimes (US-installed) Ukraine ever experienced (both of them since Yanukovich have explored new depths) that is ideologically held hostage by neo-nazis is not really something to be proud about much less call "honorable" in defending. I helped my wife's family flee to Russia they felt so happy with the changes that came with Maidan jumpers...can you really overlook the Maidan and Odessa Massacres in 2014 in which no perpetrators were found... except to blame the victims of the Odessa fire as having brought it on themselves? The neonazis (under Paruby) were in control of Maidan and the Hotel Ukraine and Conservatory from where the shots were fired at Maidan. Busloads of thugs from Kiev and state security officials were imported for the Odessa "BBQ" where they trapped and hunted down the anti-Maidan protesters inside the Trade Union Hall and poured combustible liquids over their heads, lit them, and extinguished the flames after their victims died agonizing deaths. Are you really that ignorant of the nature of those you want to defend? Wow.....

Expand full comment