"It is fair to ask, what does the US gain by supporting an expansionist NATO policy?" So far, it has gained lucrative defense contracts, and long prosperous careers for the government officials promoting the policies.
Scandinavians, Poles and Baltics love it. By going against Russia, Washington is building alliances in North-Eastern Europe. My feeling is the overwhelming majority of Finns, Swedes and Poles are happy about it, nursing grievances from back in the 18th century when Russians defeated Swedes at Poltava - not too far from the current line of control. It's not really about Neocons or some defense contracts.
The Germans, Austrians, Italians, Hungarians and Slovaks are obviously unhappy about the current situation - but remember: they were the enemies at the start of the 1st and 2nd WW.
How many divisions can the Baltic Republics field? How many wings of attack aircraft do they have? With the exception of Poland, all these alliances do is increase our chances of a major war. They're worse than useless.
It will be at least three closely integrated divisions between the three Baltic countries. Finland will be more. No aircraft to my knowledge. They're providing fighters on the ground, familiar with the local terrain. They're also buying artillery, HIMARS, I think. And don't forget, they've supported, with real fighting, all GWOT theatres since before they were in NATO. They are good fighters, by all accounts, including the Taliban. They also have provided the use of their countries as the front. So, if you think that the west wants a fight with Russia, I think it's the Eastern countries that, once again, are acting as a shield for the west. It's the eastern countries that have the right to question the west about THEIR readiness and commitment to fight, not the other way around. My opinion is that they are naive in this matter and may be betrayed and used by the West.
Russia found fighting against the Finns in 1944 difficult, even while they found their groove vis-a-vis the Wehrmacht, see operation Bagration. Never mind the absolute horror show of winter 1939, which seeded the idea of Barbarossa in the first place. If Russians fought better then, maybe Wehrmacht would have decided to march on India and not on Moscow in 1941.
Obviously, Baltics collapsed against the Red Army in 1944 easily. But that was because Wehrmacht saw no point in defending Baltics a good idea, so they denuded the territory of SS divisions staffed with Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians.
"Of course that won't stop Europe and some in Washington for pushing the proposal anyway, while shoveling more arms to Ukraine, hoping the Ukrainians can hold out until well after the US elections."
After the US elections are over and can no longer be a referendum on WWIII is when the escalation will begin in earnest.
Robert Yates, I see the “hit to American prestige” argument often and although it is reasonable, the Afghanistan withdrawal suggests it won’t matter. After 20 years the Americans humiliated themselves in Afghanistan, but nothing changed.
So yeah, you are right, Ukraine will be a hit to American prestige, but what of it? Maybe prestige is an antiquated notion, maybe it’s just power and damn the optics.
I don’t think the inevitable failure of the global American Empire and NATO in Ukraine will matter one bit. Sure, the naked power will be once again be exposed, but it will not alter their course. Iran is next, buckle in.
"Ukraine could rebuild its military, gets its economy back on track, and confront the Russians some years in the future when the prospects are better". Well...
I want peace as much as anyone, but given the mood in the Ru "siloviki" sector, Putin will be removed & replaced by a military hardliner, should he try to move in this direction.
Ru started this "operation" in order to prevent Ukr from being turned into a Western military bulwark on its border. It is much angrier&more determined now than it was in 2022. Unless it is out of men&materiel, it will not stop until this goal is achieved.
Like William Ward said, NATO is simply a costume designed to disguise US hegemony as "The Alliance of the Good Guys". It is not a credible military alliance.
“Zelensky understands that any concession he might make to Russia would be fatal for him.” To remove any ambiguity here, let’s be clear: Zelensky will be assassinated by his Azov associates if he appears willing to negotiate…that train has left the station. One would think his American handlers understand his dilemma. Perhaps they are working on a plan to extract him (along with all his embezzled American taxpayer dollars) to a safe country.
Why aren't you honest? The US uses other countries as a pawn to weaken Russia. The Georgia war, that was instigated and initiated by Georgia, clearly showed what was going on. Georgia was armed and promised the US would help in case Russia fights back and when the Russians punched back the US disappeared. Nothing else is happening in Ukraine since the US has no intention to fight Russia directly and why would they? Russia is probably the only country that can nuke the US multiple times. In the end, this policy only benefits the military industrial complex and the senators that are either directly involved or keep their citizens employed in various weapons manufacturers. It's a sick business model that the US citizens are paying for. The US simply can't live without war.
Here’s an off the wall thought for the October surprise: Putin has made a deal with Trump to blow Zelenskyy to kingdom come and march into Kiev thus collapsing NATO and wiping out the neocons which are goals of Trump. IN addition Putin makes peace with Israel and helps Trump settle the Middle East conflicts. Together they agree to create a new world order. Pipe dream for sure but someone has to dream.
If Trump had simply taken the money he borrowed from his father and parked it in an S&P 500 Index Fund and reinvested the proceeds, he'd be richer than he is today.
There may well be stupid rich people using your definition of stupid but there are very few if any weak and easily manipulated rich people. No one who has ever done business with Trump says that it was easy to make money from it by taking advantage of him so that he ended up with nothing and they walked away with all the profits and assets.
It is true as you seem to believe that if he simply put his one million dollar loan into the S and P index funds twenty five years ago, he would have theoretically increased that investment to five hundred million by now. Of course, that would require reinvesting the profits meaning he would have to work in a seven eleven or something while not touching the income for that twenty five years. Not to mention leaving aside inflation and taxes flowing from the accumulated income.
From what I have seen of Trump, I'm pretty sure he found it much more interesting to operate the business of the Miss America pageant rather than simply collecting perhaps greater (but untouched) passive income from your Index Fund investment scheme. Even more interesting than working as a vice-president in charge of the claims adjustment division of an insurance company or whatever you think it is that would have been the smart thing for him to do while watching his Index funds grow.
How can anyone disprove your beliefs about Trump? You start with the belief rather than looking at evidence to reach a conclusion.
Trump was a neo con all the time he was President! Sure thing. How can anyone disprove that? Any counterfactual example is just a case of what a slippery neo con he was. Done for no other reason than to hide just how neo con he was. Unending denunciation of Trump by neo cons and their allies....just a smoke screen to manipulate simpletons like me.
Ron Paul writes the following in his column this week:
“Has this Administration explained to us why Americans suffering after the catastrophic Hurricane Helene are on their own because we need to spend billions on a war that is none of our business? No. The neocons have wanted this war for decades and for them it’s always America last.”
Dr. Paul’s column was addressing the impending Israel/Iran war, but his words could just as easily apply to our proxy war against Russia (using the hapless Ukrainians as our cannon fodder).
Another monster storm is bearing down on the Florida Gulf Coast. No doubt FEMA will be short of money to cleanup in the aftermath.
The ‘elite’ who rule us don’t give a damn about America or Americans. Their goal is to extend the ‘American Century’ as long as possible (or at least until it ruins us all). Greed and power is the name of the game.
"Officially Russia wants Luhansk, Donbas, Zaphorize, and the Crimea recognized"
Donetsk.. and of course Kherson too.
Though my guess is that they will accept an adaptation of oblast boundaries to 'natural' lines like the Dnieper south of Kherson city, while keeping the left bank of the Oskil now in Kharkiv oblast, after they've fully taken it.
In that context I'm a bit surpised by the recent move into Plavni south of Zaporizhia, but I guess like the previous small and highly contested incursions into Kharkiv oblast south of Belgorod it's more tactical than an indication of wider territorial ambitions.
As I've said a few times here already, for me the biggest remaining question is the fate of Kramatorsk (along with smaller neighbour Sloviansk) south of the Oskil, currently capital of the rump Ukrainian Donetsk oblast.
"It is fair to ask, what does the US gain by supporting an expansionist NATO policy?"
Biden said you gain jobs in the Death Industry.
But more importantly, shareholders get bumper dividends and capital gains, and the well-paid clients of Big Defense in Congress get re-election and other help.
Here's a report on the economics of the current Middle East project, now that Ukraine is on the back burner, and America tries to refocus its 'Big Gun Problem' on the next growth market in the Pacific:
"Israel's wars mean 'massive' returns for US arms company investors - One year after Oct. 7, arms industry stocks way outperformed the S&P 500 index fund"
Somewhere in the article was a suggestion for the regime change in 404. Something that you would expect in the country that had a orange revolution in 2004 and a bloody maidan in 2014. Well, all the power to the Ukranian peace loving people (cycle of history) although, Nuland won't be in person this time around.
PS there are rumors that Iran might have tested a nuke already and that Houthis are not that grateful for being the most bombed nation on Earth besides Native Nations in New Mexico. Israel had a nuke for years. Nobody was willing to wipe out it's capabilities.
If anything American foreign policy makes me feel safe and secure.
Stephen, how come you didn't post your recent "Israel thwarted Iran missile attack but defense isn’t enough " for comment?
It's the worst column you ever wrote. You're going to ruin your reputation with these kind of stinkers. You contradict yourself along the way, which is about as bad as it gets. There are plenty of other problems with this piece as well.
Stephen usually posts all his commentary from Asia times columns on his substack. I think a number of provocative claims were made in this article that are worthwhile discussing.
"It is fair to ask, what does the US gain by supporting an expansionist NATO policy?" So far, it has gained lucrative defense contracts, and long prosperous careers for the government officials promoting the policies.
Scandinavians, Poles and Baltics love it. By going against Russia, Washington is building alliances in North-Eastern Europe. My feeling is the overwhelming majority of Finns, Swedes and Poles are happy about it, nursing grievances from back in the 18th century when Russians defeated Swedes at Poltava - not too far from the current line of control. It's not really about Neocons or some defense contracts.
The Germans, Austrians, Italians, Hungarians and Slovaks are obviously unhappy about the current situation - but remember: they were the enemies at the start of the 1st and 2nd WW.
How many divisions can the Baltic Republics field? How many wings of attack aircraft do they have? With the exception of Poland, all these alliances do is increase our chances of a major war. They're worse than useless.
It will be at least three closely integrated divisions between the three Baltic countries. Finland will be more. No aircraft to my knowledge. They're providing fighters on the ground, familiar with the local terrain. They're also buying artillery, HIMARS, I think. And don't forget, they've supported, with real fighting, all GWOT theatres since before they were in NATO. They are good fighters, by all accounts, including the Taliban. They also have provided the use of their countries as the front. So, if you think that the west wants a fight with Russia, I think it's the Eastern countries that, once again, are acting as a shield for the west. It's the eastern countries that have the right to question the west about THEIR readiness and commitment to fight, not the other way around. My opinion is that they are naive in this matter and may be betrayed and used by the West.
Russia found fighting against the Finns in 1944 difficult, even while they found their groove vis-a-vis the Wehrmacht, see operation Bagration. Never mind the absolute horror show of winter 1939, which seeded the idea of Barbarossa in the first place. If Russians fought better then, maybe Wehrmacht would have decided to march on India and not on Moscow in 1941.
Obviously, Baltics collapsed against the Red Army in 1944 easily. But that was because Wehrmacht saw no point in defending Baltics a good idea, so they denuded the territory of SS divisions staffed with Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians.
Not to mentionm european grovelling.
As far as the neocons are concerned, things have gone swimmingly.
"Of course that won't stop Europe and some in Washington for pushing the proposal anyway, while shoveling more arms to Ukraine, hoping the Ukrainians can hold out until well after the US elections."
After the US elections are over and can no longer be a referendum on WWIII is when the escalation will begin in earnest.
You're probably right regardless of who wins. The US has invested too much prestige to just walk away.
I wish I were wrong. I hope I am wrong.
However, the abuse of The Sunk Cost Fallacy is assuredly entirely intentional.
Robert Yates, I see the “hit to American prestige” argument often and although it is reasonable, the Afghanistan withdrawal suggests it won’t matter. After 20 years the Americans humiliated themselves in Afghanistan, but nothing changed.
So yeah, you are right, Ukraine will be a hit to American prestige, but what of it? Maybe prestige is an antiquated notion, maybe it’s just power and damn the optics.
I don’t think the inevitable failure of the global American Empire and NATO in Ukraine will matter one bit. Sure, the naked power will be once again be exposed, but it will not alter their course. Iran is next, buckle in.
Addendum:
George Orwell ,
The past will be erased, the erasure will be forgotten, and the lie will become the truth.
Prestige assumes you care.
"Ukraine could rebuild its military, gets its economy back on track, and confront the Russians some years in the future when the prospects are better". Well...
I want peace as much as anyone, but given the mood in the Ru "siloviki" sector, Putin will be removed & replaced by a military hardliner, should he try to move in this direction.
Ru started this "operation" in order to prevent Ukr from being turned into a Western military bulwark on its border. It is much angrier&more determined now than it was in 2022. Unless it is out of men&materiel, it will not stop until this goal is achieved.
Like William Ward said, NATO is simply a costume designed to disguise US hegemony as "The Alliance of the Good Guys". It is not a credible military alliance.
I call it "The Enforcement Arm of American Capitalism"
“Zelensky understands that any concession he might make to Russia would be fatal for him.” To remove any ambiguity here, let’s be clear: Zelensky will be assassinated by his Azov associates if he appears willing to negotiate…that train has left the station. One would think his American handlers understand his dilemma. Perhaps they are working on a plan to extract him (along with all his embezzled American taxpayer dollars) to a safe country.
Why aren't you honest? The US uses other countries as a pawn to weaken Russia. The Georgia war, that was instigated and initiated by Georgia, clearly showed what was going on. Georgia was armed and promised the US would help in case Russia fights back and when the Russians punched back the US disappeared. Nothing else is happening in Ukraine since the US has no intention to fight Russia directly and why would they? Russia is probably the only country that can nuke the US multiple times. In the end, this policy only benefits the military industrial complex and the senators that are either directly involved or keep their citizens employed in various weapons manufacturers. It's a sick business model that the US citizens are paying for. The US simply can't live without war.
Here’s an off the wall thought for the October surprise: Putin has made a deal with Trump to blow Zelenskyy to kingdom come and march into Kiev thus collapsing NATO and wiping out the neocons which are goals of Trump. IN addition Putin makes peace with Israel and helps Trump settle the Middle East conflicts. Together they agree to create a new world order. Pipe dream for sure but someone has to dream.
Don't kid yourself. Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
But a person has the right to dream! 😄
You’re the one kidding himself. One doesn’t become a billionaire buildings in nyc if what you say were true.
If Trump had simply taken the money he borrowed from his father and parked it in an S&P 500 Index Fund and reinvested the proceeds, he'd be richer than he is today.
As if there were no stupid rich people, lol.
There may well be stupid rich people using your definition of stupid but there are very few if any weak and easily manipulated rich people. No one who has ever done business with Trump says that it was easy to make money from it by taking advantage of him so that he ended up with nothing and they walked away with all the profits and assets.
It is true as you seem to believe that if he simply put his one million dollar loan into the S and P index funds twenty five years ago, he would have theoretically increased that investment to five hundred million by now. Of course, that would require reinvesting the profits meaning he would have to work in a seven eleven or something while not touching the income for that twenty five years. Not to mention leaving aside inflation and taxes flowing from the accumulated income.
From what I have seen of Trump, I'm pretty sure he found it much more interesting to operate the business of the Miss America pageant rather than simply collecting perhaps greater (but untouched) passive income from your Index Fund investment scheme. Even more interesting than working as a vice-president in charge of the claims adjustment division of an insurance company or whatever you think it is that would have been the smart thing for him to do while watching his Index funds grow.
www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/10/02/trumps-small-loan-from-his-father-was-more-like-60point7-million-nyt.html
Anyway, the idea that Trump is doing it all for the yukks is a laugh.
You’re just full of TDS. That’s another myth
Should be easy to disprove, but instead you do the equivalent of jamming your fingers in your ears and shouting "I can't hear you!"
We had Trump’s record from 2016-2020, a pathetic little cuck bullied into submission by the neocons.
How can anyone disprove your beliefs about Trump? You start with the belief rather than looking at evidence to reach a conclusion.
Trump was a neo con all the time he was President! Sure thing. How can anyone disprove that? Any counterfactual example is just a case of what a slippery neo con he was. Done for no other reason than to hide just how neo con he was. Unending denunciation of Trump by neo cons and their allies....just a smoke screen to manipulate simpletons like me.
I was having the same day dream.
Ron Paul writes the following in his column this week:
“Has this Administration explained to us why Americans suffering after the catastrophic Hurricane Helene are on their own because we need to spend billions on a war that is none of our business? No. The neocons have wanted this war for decades and for them it’s always America last.”
Dr. Paul’s column was addressing the impending Israel/Iran war, but his words could just as easily apply to our proxy war against Russia (using the hapless Ukrainians as our cannon fodder).
Another monster storm is bearing down on the Florida Gulf Coast. No doubt FEMA will be short of money to cleanup in the aftermath.
The ‘elite’ who rule us don’t give a damn about America or Americans. Their goal is to extend the ‘American Century’ as long as possible (or at least until it ruins us all). Greed and power is the name of the game.
Dr. Paul’s entire column can be found here:
https://ronpaulinstitute.org/american-neocons-get-their-iran-war-as-congress-sleeps/
Good analysis, but the conclusion one should draw is time to leave NATO, among other places.
"Officially Russia wants Luhansk, Donbas, Zaphorize, and the Crimea recognized"
Donetsk.. and of course Kherson too.
Though my guess is that they will accept an adaptation of oblast boundaries to 'natural' lines like the Dnieper south of Kherson city, while keeping the left bank of the Oskil now in Kharkiv oblast, after they've fully taken it.
In that context I'm a bit surpised by the recent move into Plavni south of Zaporizhia, but I guess like the previous small and highly contested incursions into Kharkiv oblast south of Belgorod it's more tactical than an indication of wider territorial ambitions.
As I've said a few times here already, for me the biggest remaining question is the fate of Kramatorsk (along with smaller neighbour Sloviansk) south of the Oskil, currently capital of the rump Ukrainian Donetsk oblast.
Time to cut the euro slackers loose.
"It is fair to ask, what does the US gain by supporting an expansionist NATO policy?"
Biden said you gain jobs in the Death Industry.
But more importantly, shareholders get bumper dividends and capital gains, and the well-paid clients of Big Defense in Congress get re-election and other help.
Here's a report on the economics of the current Middle East project, now that Ukraine is on the back burner, and America tries to refocus its 'Big Gun Problem' on the next growth market in the Pacific:
"Israel's wars mean 'massive' returns for US arms company investors - One year after Oct. 7, arms industry stocks way outperformed the S&P 500 index fund"
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/october-7-hamas-attack/
*Follow the Money*
Somewhere in the article was a suggestion for the regime change in 404. Something that you would expect in the country that had a orange revolution in 2004 and a bloody maidan in 2014. Well, all the power to the Ukranian peace loving people (cycle of history) although, Nuland won't be in person this time around.
PS there are rumors that Iran might have tested a nuke already and that Houthis are not that grateful for being the most bombed nation on Earth besides Native Nations in New Mexico. Israel had a nuke for years. Nobody was willing to wipe out it's capabilities.
If anything American foreign policy makes me feel safe and secure.
Concordo
If Trump would do what JFK talked about, NATO would have to die as a orphan.
Stephen, how come you didn't post your recent "Israel thwarted Iran missile attack but defense isn’t enough " for comment?
It's the worst column you ever wrote. You're going to ruin your reputation with these kind of stinkers. You contradict yourself along the way, which is about as bad as it gets. There are plenty of other problems with this piece as well.
I have a totally different view than yours, which I don't accept.
OK. Thank you Stephen for responding. When you post that article I have some detailed commentary that I think is worth discussing.
Curious readers will find this article here:
https://asiatimes.com/2024/10/israel-thwarted-iran-missile-attack-but-defense-isnt-enough/
I don't think it was a substack post. It is a highly technical article which I did not read. Little or no politics.
Stephen usually posts all his commentary from Asia times columns on his substack. I think a number of provocative claims were made in this article that are worthwhile discussing.