February 27, 2023

How you know he's not serious about stopping Russia

Let's Go Brandon has sent what, $120 billion dollars to the Ukraine to fight off the Russia invasion.  But he won't send fighter jets and worse still, Poland wanted to send fighter jets and he vetoed the idea.  During the Trump presidency, we knew there was a problem with Europe pulling it's own weight in NATO and if ever there was a need for them to do so, it's now that Russia has brought war to the NATO European's doorstep. 

Why would Let's Go Brandon nix the sharing of fighter jets to Ukraine? Poland has Russia MiGs, it's not like the Russians could capture advanced NATO technology by downing a Ukrainian pilot and capturing the wreckage of the plane; it's their own technology.  It's been speculated that the 'brain trust' behind Let's Go Brandon's 'strategy' in dealing with the Ukraine invasion are worried that if Ukrainian pilots go past the Russian border and bomb inside of Russia it could cause Putin to declare this is a war of aggression by NATO. Twisted, illogical, but from Putin it's likely.

It causes more problems; the will of the Russian people are not strongly behind this invasion.  An incursion into Russian territory could easily change that to a more nationalistic mood.  That combined with Putin's vague nuclear threats brings up the possibility of a tactical nuclear engagement.

There's an argument to be made that these factors make sense of the decision to disallow fighter jets to be dispensed by any NATO ally to the Ukraine.  Here's the problem; if you believe that is the case why are you sending billions of dollars into a war where eventually, you are going to be on the losing side? You are sinking A LOT of money into an engagement that becomes a no-win scenario. A LOT of money. All this while simultaneously ignoring a man-made disaster at home.

Let me play "Brandon's advocate" again for a minute. Russia is a geopolitical adversary. They have been so since at least 1946 and arguably earlier. If the war is unwinnable and even if there is no strategic value to NATO and the West for the country (arguably there is), the invasion presents an opportunity to significantly weaken a geopolitical adversary and ensure their victory is at best a pyrrhic victory. If it costs Russia lives and far too much treasure to emerge with Ukraine or vast stretches of Ukraine in Russia's pocket, it could dramatically weaken the imperialist nation, removing them for at least decades as a existential threat to America, allowing the United States to focus on China.  With Russian demographics not on their side, it could accelerate the end of the Russian empire, relegating them to a far more local sphere of influence.

Okay, the Let's Go Brandon establishment case has been stated.  We know he's not serious about ensuring Ukraine wins; you don't fight an enemy with one hand tied behind your back (Vietnam is a prime example), but he (or rather the Pentagon) may have a case in weakening Russia.  Again, there's a problem.  Russia has other weapons at it's disposal besides its clearly lackluster army.  It has its own air force and it won't hesitate to use it: 


While the above assessment doesn't hold out much hope of Russian air power turning the tide of war, but what if it's wrong? Then what?  If Ukraine had been able to step up defensively in the air war, then Russia would be further stymied. But thanks to Let's Go Brandon, that's likely not going to be the case and they may be caught off guard when Russia brings its own air force to bear.  Or what if it goes badly and Russia panics into indiscriminate use of tactical nukes? What would NATO's answer be?

Again, what are the objectives for America/NATO here?  It's hard to tell if the strategy and tactics align with the objectives unless the objectives are just to drain Russia as much as possible before it eventually succeeds in taking Ukraine.  That in itself is a good geopolitical objective but it's being dishonest with the Ukrainian people.  Dishonesty however, is Let's Go Brandon's stock in trade.


  1. The object is not to win. Or Lose. The sole objective in Ukraine is; (1) to launder as much money as possible before the country falls and the opportunity is lost; and (2) to destroy as much American equipment and material as possible so as to have new, multi-billion dollar contracts issued.
    Always, I repeat, Always follow the money.

  2. No argument here. My point was limited to simply point out that winning is clearly not the objective and that is decidedly detrimental to America.


Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This