June 6. 1944 – A Testament to American Greatness 

Joker, i actualy concur with you and there is no strategic thinking.

What began as a fairly straightforward U.S. policy of arming Ukraine with defensive weapons against Russian aggression has now expanded into dangerous and rapid escalation. We now have embarked on the inevitable slippery slope of mission creep and where we will end up will probably not be where we had intended. If history has taught us anything it is that before engaging in an armed conflict, we must have a clearly defined end state and the strategy (the ends, way, and means) of achieving it. Right now, we have neither – the ghosts of Lyndon Johnson’s Vietnam still haunt us.

With the recent passage of the recent $40 billion aid package the Biden administration is pursuing a policy of escalation in Ukraine that represents a new and dangerous phase in the conflict. Initially the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine rather straightforwardly, with supplies of defensive arms and humanitarian supplies to the Ukrainians and economic sanctions on Russia. But recent events that could have unintended consequences.

Now, instead of simply helping Ukraine stave off the Russian invasion, U.S. policy seems to have shifted into something else entirely: the permanent weakening and dismemberment of Russia at any cost. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin after a clandestine visit to Ukraine with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken stated, “We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” After her own recent “heels on the ground” visit to Kyiv, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi characterized the war as a “global struggle for democracy.”

It also appears the U.S. military may also be providing real-time battlefield targeting intelligence to the Ukrainians thus making the United States by definition an active belligerent in the conflict. This amounts to a major policy shift on the part of the United States. Initially the primary Western objective was to defend against the invasion and now it appears to be the permanent attrition and weakening of Russia.

So what possible strategic gain does bleeding Russia in Ukraine hold for the United States? The risks of pursuing such a policy are immense, including the possibility of thermo nuclear war between the world’s top two nuclear powers where there will be no “winners.” If the Biden administration has some overarching goal in mind, it has not laid it out in detail for the American people and garnered their support.

Even former US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral (ret.) Mike Mullen stated last month on ABC this Week “We need to make sure that we consider [a Russian nuclear attack] as a possibility, both a tactical and, God forbid, the strategic force. [Putin is] pretty well cornered and boxed in, so we would certainly have to consider it’s a possible action he can take.” Scary stuff as a result of the current administration’s ineptitude and by the way we have NO defense against Russian Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles – none !

And recently President Biden unilaterally went off script and declared during a routine reporters query we would defend Taiwan and in one word undoing decades worth of American Foreign policy built on “strategic ambiguity.” Incredulous and the subject of a future Viewpoint.

As GEN Colin Powell warned in his “Powell Doctrine” in the run up to the Gulf War, we must have clearly defined national security interests and widespread public support before undertaking any large-scale military action. President Biden has failed to do this. Somehow, I think GEN Powell is shaking his head as we continue to slide down the slippery slope with perhaps unintended consequences which may include Armageddon. An end state that may be inevitable based on our current uncharted and misdirected path.