A plain reading of Mattis’ 2018 NDS, coupled with Trump’s actual Russia policy, confirms that Washington has been confronting China and Russia on two fronts since at least 2016. The 11th hour alterations to the 2022 NDS are a de facto continuation of this policy.
And it’s only driving Russia and China together—in further opposition to the West.
On Monday, March 28, the Pentagon submitted its 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) to Congress. While the entire report remains classified, an unclassified fact sheet was released to the media. It identified the Pentagon’s four main defense priorities:
Defending the homeland, paced to the growing multi-domain threat posed by the PRC.
Deterring strategic attacks against the United States, Allies, and its partners
Deterring aggression, while being prepared to prevail in conflict when necessary, prioritizing the PRC challenge in the Indo-Pacific, then the Russia challenge in Europe
Building a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem.
The new NDS is the first since 2018, when General James Mattis declared, “inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in U.S. national security.”
The 2018 NDS identified Washington’s four main competitors and split them into two categories: “revisionist powers” Russia and China, and “rogue regimes” Iran and North Korea. In its threat hierarchy, it placed Russia and China together at the top.
While the Pentagon’s 2022 strategy still names Russia an “acute” threat, it designates China as its “most consequential strategic competitor and [] pacing challenge.”
Although the Pentagon’s new grand strategy of “Great Power Competition” was declared only four years ago, its hubris is already apparent: the United States does not have the means to dominate the world, nor does it know how to do so.
The issuance of the 2022 NDS itself exemplifies this folly.
It is customary for a publicly available, unclassified summary to accompany the release of the classified NDS that is submitted to Congress. In 2018, the unclassified summary tallied fourteen full pages.
The full 2022 strategy, however, was submitted to Congress without a publicly available summary. Instead, the Defense Department provided a paltry two-page fact sheet.
If this administration and like-minded officials in state capitols have their way, the disruptions and empty shelves that we hope now to be temporary would be anything but. Instead, they would be a new way of life. Furthermore, we still would have tornadoes in Oklahoma and Alabama, wildfires in California, and hurricanes on the East Coast. Nothing would change but our ability to deal with the elements, and that would mean people freezing in their homes in winter and unable to cool their homes in hot summers. (And none of Biden’s climate initiatives will make summers in the Deep South any more bearable.)
One of the saddest quotes from the Vietnam War came from journalist Peter Arnett, who wrote in a dispatch in 1968 about an American attack on a Vietcong-held village: “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.” As often happens with such quotes, they take on a second and even third life. Today, the Biden administration seeks to destroy the American economy ostensibly to save America from the dreaded climate change.
No one advocating the so-called Green New Deal (GND) has put it quite like that. In fact, its advocates claim that not only will the GND give us better weather, but it will raise the standard of living in the USA by “creating millions of new, high-paying jobs.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren claims on her website that the GND under her leadership (if she ever were elected president) would “create 10.6 million green jobs,” adding:
While climate change presents an urgent threat, it also presents the greatest opportunity of our time: the chance to rebuild our economy with 100% clean energy, to address the racial and economic inequality embedded in our fossil fuel economy, and to create millions of good, union jobs in the process.
One needs to ask how she came up with such numbers and such an optimistic outlook, but one gets the picture. The web is full of apocalyptic claims about climate change, many coming from the US government and the assorted groups. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one of the sponsors of the proposed Green New Deal, has openly claimed that the world literally will end in twelve years if we don’t stop carbon dioxide emissions now.
As Michael Shellenberger has pointed out in many publications, including Forbes, the claims of the coming apocalypse are a bit premature. Addressing the claim made by environmentalists that billions of people will perish in the coming disasters, he writes:
In 1931, 3.7 million people died from natural disasters. In 2018, just 11,000 did. And that decline occurred over a period when the global population quadrupled.
What about sea level rise? IPCC estimates sea level could rise two feet (0.6 meters) by 2100. Does that sound apocalyptic or even “unmanageable”?
Consider that one-third of the Netherlands is below sea level, and some areas areseven meters below sea level. You might object that Netherlands is rich while Bangladesh is poor. But the Netherlands adapted to living below sea level 400 years ago. Technology has improved a bit since then.
What about claims of crop failure, famine, and mass death? That’s science fiction, not science. Humans today produce enough food for 10 billion people, or 25% more than we need, and scientific bodies predict increases in that share, not declines. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts crop yields increasing 30% by 2050. And the poorest parts of the world, like sub-Saharan Africa, are expected to see increases of 80 to 90%.
Not surprisingly, President Joe Biden has sided with the most radical alarmists and has taken action from day 1 in his presidency to curtail and ultimately destroy the oil and gas industries in the USA. Last year, I wrote that this administration was attacking these industries on every front, but Biden now claims that his government is doing nothing of the sort. He repeated the claim at a recent press conference: “It’s simply not true that my administration or policies are holding back domestic energy production.”
Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution a little more than two hundred years ago, the human race has made unprecedented progress in material and social welfare. There is no reason to think this progress has stalled or even slowed down. Nothing will restrain the engine of human creativity and ingenuity. Not everything will appear in the future as we envisage it today. But the synergistic confluence of nuclear power, artificial intelligence, and robotics heralds the imminence of a Golden Age.
Where I live in Oklahoma we’re regularly hit with winter ice storms that cause massive power outages. Tree limbs, weighted with ice, fall and bring down power lines. In the wake of these storms, there’s invariably a call for burying electric power lines underground. It never happens because of the cost of construction and the difficulty of accessing and maintaining buried cables.
This will change. In the future all utility lines will move underground. The problem of cost will solve itself. Everything involving technology becomes less expensive over time. The problem of access for maintenance was solved a long time ago. Roman aqueducts were capacious enough to allow entrance for periodic removal of sinter deposits.
The electric grid will move underground. Not by burying cables, but by constructing networks of tunnels several meters in diameter at depths of tens of meters. As Generation IV fission and/or fusion power reactors come online in the next few decades, nuclear power will begin to replace fossil fuels. Renewables will fade to irrelevance. The electric grid will evolve to a multiplex of small to medium-sized underground generating stations that communicate with each other and are supervised by human technicians aided by artificial intelligence. Generation capacity will have sufficient reserve and redundancy to meet any conceivable emergency. Electricity will be inexpensive and abundant. Power outages will become so rare as to be virtually non-existent.
Individual homes will also move partly underground. Houses will have a surface unit with daily living quarters flooded by natural light and fresh air. These will be connected with underground chambers that link directly with a regional tunnel system. In the future, if you desire to travel, you will descend to a dock underneath your house that connects directly with a tunnel. You will enter an automated electric-powered vehicular pod that will take you effortlessly to your destination at the highest possible speed. The position of your pod will be constantly relayed to a central control system that can effortlessly coordinate the movement of millions of vehicles. Traffic jams, delays due to inclement weather, and accidents will cease to exist as artificial intelligence algorithms manage transportation to achieve maximum possible efficiency. The movement of industrial and commercial supplies will also be vastly improved. When you purchase an item on the internet, it will be delivered to your house within a matter of hours by automated systems moving through the universal tunnel system. You will wake up in the morning to unpack a box of fresh groceries delivered overnight and placed in a refrigerated unit on your property by robots.
Underground infrastructure is robust. An underground electric grid can be shielded and hardened against the threat posed by both geomagnetic storms and EMPs. Underground transportation and utility systems are also less vulnerable to terrorist attacks and natural disasters. With the exception of features such as elevated roadways, surface space available for infrastructure is inherently limited to two dimensions. Underground is three-dimensional. There’s always room to add an additional tunnel by digging deeper. There’s a reason the world’s foremost technological visionary, Elon Musk, has invested in tunnel-boring technology.
We have reason to be optimistic about the future. With the emergence of the demographic transition, humanity has solved its greatest environmental problem: overpopulation. It is anticipated that human population will peak near 10 billion in the second half of this century and then begin to decline. Moving human infrastructure underground will free up more land area for preservation of the natural environment. Nuclear power will make any concerns over global warming moot. Agriculture will evolve radically. Due to dramatic increases in the efficiency of production, global land area under cultivation has already begun to decline. We have robots guided by artificial intelligence that use lasers to kill weeds. Pesticides will be phased out as this technology is extended to eradicate insects. Robotic labor guided by artificial intelligence will be harnessed to clean up waste dumps. If we embrace advanced technology, the promise of a pristine and restored environment lies within our grasp.
Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution a little more than two hundred years ago, the human race has made unprecedented progress in material and social welfare. There is no reason to think this progress has stalled or even slowed down. Nothing will restrain the engine of human creativity and ingenuity. Not everything will appear in the future as we envisage it today. But the synergistic confluence of nuclear power, artificial intelligence, and robotics heralds the imminence of a Golden Age.
The Department of Homeland Security is disseminating a mass migration plan devoid of removal mechanisms to replace the soon-to-end CDC Title 42 emergency order. The plan predicts that DHS traditional processing capabilities will be overwhelmed and require an increase in the use of “broadscale release mechanisms.”
The plan, reviewed by Breitbart Texas, acknowledges the end of Title 42 will likely result in a surge in illegal migration along the southwest border. The increase is already manifesting itself as apprehensions rise. In March, Border Patrol agents apprehended more than 200,000 migrants.
The draft plan, recently circulated to senior DHS staff, is dated February 17, 2022. A source within the agency, not authorized to speak to the media, says the plan offers no concrete options other than to exhaust more resources to absorb what will likely be a historic wave of migrants at the southern border.
The source says the agency is already exceeding temporary detention capacity at most facilities and the plan will likely mean more holding space will be needed. Cost estimates to operate one temporary facility exceed $5 million per month, according to the source.
The DHS Southwest Border Mass Irregular Migration Contingency Plan tells senior leadership to prepare “federal to federal” support agreements to quickly move personnel and funds to DHS agencies.
The plan offers assumptions once Title 42 is ended and includes the acknowledgement that few legal pathways to removal are left in the wake of early executive actions under the Biden Administration.
The document offers ominous predictions about the impacts of the pending surge to the U.S.-Mexico Border. The DHS document claims most released migrants do not appear for subsequent removal proceedings. It continues:
Current pathways to removal will be limited. Component use of broadscale release mechanisms (i.e., Own Recognizance (OR) with issuance of a Notice to Appear (NTA), or parole and Alternatives to Detention (ATD)) with administrative tools are necessary to ensure humane and efficient treatment of migrants)
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) will continue to leverage the FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) to provide life sustaining food, shelter, and supporting services. In addition, NGOs shall provide travel assistance from CBP custody. (Footnote: The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 made available $110 million to FEMA EFSP for this purpose.)
ICE Alternatives to Detention (ATD) will be implemented on a greater scale. (Footnote: Increased processing speeds, throughput, and the use of ATD is the quickest solution for processing FMUAs where Title 42 is no longer viable. However, relatively low percentages of FMUAs reported for removal proceedings in the past once released on ATD. There is no evidence that a higher percentage of noncitizens will report for removal proceedings in the future if released, regardless of how expeditiously they are processed.)
The plan includes an additional focus on a “Whole of Western Hemisphere” approach as a solution to the worsening border crisis. Part of the plan, reviewed by Breitbart Texas, includes efforts to improve living conditions outside the United States.
The plan does not specify a cost associated with the pending surge in migration.
Randy Clark is a 32-year veteran of the United States Border Patrol. Prior to his retirement, he served as the Division Chief for Law Enforcement Operations, directing operations for nine Border Patrol Stations within the Del Rio, Texas, Sector. Follow him on Twitter @RandyClarkBBTX.
I certainly agree with Mr. Block’s philosophical analysis bit I also agree with the comment that implies this was all fake. Academy Award ratings are in free fall. This is Hollywood’s solution. Gratuitous violence. It could have been a live revival of Basic Instinct.
Will Smith slapped Chris Rock during the 2022 Academy Awards Ceremony. What likely shall, or should, be the aftermath of this incident of public assault and battery?
First of all, let it be said, this was not a school yard incident between six-year-old children. Mr. Smith is a mature adult. Second, although subjectivity is always relevant in matters of humor, it can fairly be said that Mr. Rock’s joke would be considered by most people to be in very poor taste.
But is physical violence the proper response to offensive verbal statements? It is hard to maintain that it ever is, at least not in a civilized society. If anyone deserved a slap for what he did, it was Smith, not Rock. What should Mr. Smith have done after this joke went awry? He should have limited himself to a verbal response. Can anyone imagine Pope Francis or Thomas Sowell or Woody Allen or Martin Luther King, Jr. or Albert Einstein or Justice Clarence Thomas or Congressman Ron Paul or the Dali Lama acting like this in such a context? Of course not: these are all civilized people. None of them would get caught dead slapping anyone upside the head in response to a bad joke.
How should the forces of law and order react to this act of initiatory violence? In one view, crimes concern only victims. There is no such thing as a crime against “society.” Under such a legal code, the reaction would all be up to Chris Rock. He could ignore this outrage, he could sue Will Smith for financial damages for this bodily injury, he could demand physical punishment (a jail sentence) for the aggressor. As it happens, he has declined to press charges.
But we do not live under that law. Offenses such as Smith’s, to be sure, are interpreted as a violation of the rights of the victim. But they are also seen as an invasion of “society.” For this purpose, we have attorneys general. They are able to bring charges against criminals even if the victim is willing to forgive the perpetrator, as has now occurred. From the perspective of the logic of this system, how should the attorney general now act?
Clearly, he should bring charges against Mr. Will Smith for assault and battery. Why? For one thing, this was a public slap. Millions of people watched these goings on at the Academy Award Ceremonies, including impressionable youngsters. If no repercussions are visited on Will Smith, the implication taken away by them will likely be that such behavior is justified, acceptable; is, even, to be applauded. The next time someone says something thought to be objectionable, instead of a verbal reply or even a “cancellation,” physical violence will have been rendered more likely. Is that really the direction in which people of good will would wish our country to move? For another, there is a simple matter of justice. The attorney general is put into place to promote that end. If people may slap each other around without negative consequences ordinary fairness will have been denigrated and disrespected.
Then there is the economics of the matter (that is not a typographical error). A basic premise of this discipline is that demand curves slope downward. The desire to engage in criminal behavior is no exception to this primordial insight. If the “price” is high, we will tend to have less of any given item or behavior; if the price is low or non-existent, then more. What is the price of crime? It is punishment. Will Smith deserves a term in prison for his criminal act.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Milley, told Congress that NATO needs to build more permanent bases on Russia’s border in response to the Ukraine conflict and that the conflict will last years. More US troops on Russia’s borders will act as a “deterrent.” The military-industrial-Congressional complex is no-doubt thrilled. Also today – New York City mom fired from city job after asking the mayor about his new toddler mask mandate.
It helps whenever you botch a Ukrianian foreign government overthrow.
The CIA bought and paid for a brand of Ukrainian Nationalism à la Lebed. One of the most horrifying butchers of OUN/UPA was given reign to shape the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people around their nationalist identity, an identity as defined by the OUN. It is also shaped historical and cultural interpretation such as to further romanticise the concept of the great Ukrainian race of Volodomyr the Great, encouraging a further sense of superiority and further divide between themselves and Belarussians and Russians.
The birth of Ukrainian Nationalism as it is celebrated today has its origins in the 20th century. However, there are a few important historical highlights that should be known beforehand.
In part 1 of this series Fact Checking the Fact Checkers, the question was posed “why does Ukraine seem to have so many Nazis nowadays?” In that paper we were led to the further question “is the United States and possibly NATO involved in the funding, training and political support of neo-Nazism in Ukraine and if so, for what purpose?” It was concluded that in order to answer such questions fully, we would have to look at the historical root of Ukrainian nationalism and its relationship with U.S. Intelligence and NATO post-WWII. It is here that we will resume.
The Historical Roots of Ukrainian Nationalism
The birth of Ukrainian Nationalism as it is celebrated today has its origins in the 20th century. However, there are a few important historical highlights that should be known beforehand.
Kievan Rus’ was a federation in Eastern-Northern Europe from the late 9th to the mid-13th century and was made up of a variety of peoples including East Slavic, Baltic and Finnic, and was ruled by the Rurik dynasty.
Above image: The principalities of the later Kievan Rus’ (after the death of Yaroslav I in 1054). Source Wikipedia.
Today’s Belarus, Russia and Ukraine all recognize the people of Kievan Rus’ as their cultural ancestors.
Kievan Rus’ would fall during the Mongol invasion of the 1240s, however, different branches of the Rurik dynasty would continue to rule parts of Rus’ under the Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia (modern-day Ukraine and Belarus), the Novgorod Republic (overlapping with modern-day Finland and Russia) and Vladimir-Suzdal (regarded as the cradle of the Great Russian language and nationality which evolved into the Grand Duchy of Moscow).
The Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia was under the vassalage of the Golden Horde during the 14th century, which was originally a Mongol and later Turkicized khanate originating as the northwestern section of the Mongol Empire.
After the poisoning of Yuri II Boleslav, King of Galicia-Volhynia in 1340, civil war ensued along with a power struggle for control over the region between Lithuania, Poland and its ally Hungary. Several wars would be fought from 1340-1392 known as the Galicia-Volhynia wars.
In 1349, the Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia was conquered and incorporated into Poland.
In 1569 the Union of Lublin took place, joining the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania forming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth which ruled as a large and major power for over 200 years.
From 1648-1657 the Khmelnytsky Uprising, also known as the Cossack-Polish War took place in the eastern territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which led to the creation of a Cossack Hetmanate in Ukraine.
Under the command of Khmelnytsky, the Zaporozhian Cossacks, allied with the Crimean Tatars and local Ukrainian peasantry, fought against Polish domination and against the Commonwealth forces; which was followed by the massacre of Polish-Lithuanian townsfolk, the Roman Catholic clergy and the Jews.
Khmelnytsky to this day is a major heroic figure in the Ukrainian nationalist history.
By 1772, the once powerful Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had too far declined to further govern itself and went through three partitions, conducted by the Habsburg Monarchy, the Kingdom of Prussia and the Russian Empire.
From the first partition of Poland in 1772, the name “Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria” was granted to the Habsburg Monarchy (Austrian Empire, which later became the Austria-Hungarian Empire in 1867). Most of Volhynia would go to the Russian Empire in 1795.
Above image: Partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (often referred to just as Poland) in 1772, 1793 and 1795.
By 1914, Europe would be dragged into WWI. In March 1918, after two months of negotiations with the Central Powers (the German, Austria-Hungary, Bulgarian, and Ottoman Empire), the new Bolshevik government of Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk ceding claims on Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as the condition for peace (Note: the Bolshevik Revolution began in March 1917). WWI would officially end on November 11th, 1918.
MCViewPoint 