Tag Archive for: WW III

Paul Craig Roberts: ‘The March to the Third World War Continues’

This is a bit of a different perspective from a wise elder-statesman, economist, scholar and journalist, Mr. Paul Craig Roberts. Could Putin be exercising too much restraint for his own good and the good of the Russian people? And could that restraint end up backfiring into a nuclear-fought World War? These are questions examined by Roberts in the must-read article below.


The March to the Third World War Continues

By Paul Craig RobertsInstitute for Political Economy

I admire Putin, but I am his critic. I think he is unintentionally leading us into World War 3.

Putin’s limited military operation in Ukraine confined to clearing Ukrainian Nazi militias and Ukrainian military forces out of Donbas, a Russian speaking province attached to Ukraine by Soviet leaders as was Russian Crimea, was a strategic blunder.

It was a strategic blunder that followed four or five previous strategic blunders within the Ukraine context. There were others outside the Ukraine context.

Donbas formed into two independent republics in response to the anti-Russian coup orchestrated by the United States that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government. Putin’s first strategic blunder was in permitting Washington’s overthrow of the democratically elected Ukrainian government.

In 2014 after the overthrow of the Ukrainian government the two independent Donbas republics voted overwhelmingly, as did Crimea, to be reincorporated into Russia. Putin accepted Crimea’s request, as otherwise Russia would lose its Black Sea naval base, but rejected the request of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics.

This was Putin’s second strategic blunder. If Putin or the Kremlin or the Russian government had given equal treatment to Donetsk and Luhansk a decade ago in 2014, there would have been no limited military operation with Ukraine. Neither Ukraine, NATO, nor Washington would dared to have attacked Russian territory in order to “recover Donbass.”

If the US persisted in bringing Ukraine into NATO, Putin would have been forced to recognize that he was at war with the West and that he had no alternative but to reestablish Ukraine to its many centuries existence as a part of Russia. Ukraine’s “independence” is an American creation 30 years old. Every Western analyst has overlooked, or kept silent about, the fact that the dismemberment of Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union is like the dismemberment of Germany after World War I, the difference being that Hitler was determined to put Germany back together but Putin has no such ambition. If truth be known, Putin is essentially a 20th century Western liberal, and this is why he is failing as a war leader of Russia in the 21st century.

Instead of accepting the Donbas vote, Putin elected to leave Donbas in Ukraine, but he tried to protect the Russian population there with the Minsk Agreement sometimes called the Minsk Protocol. Briefly, under the Minsk Agreement, Donbas remained in Ukraine but was granted some forms of autonomy, such as its own police force in order to protect the Russian population from being persecuted by the Ukrainian government. Putin secured the signatures of Ukraine and the two independent republics to the agreement, and he secured the agreement of Germany and France to enforce the agreement. Quite clearly, despite the obvious lies of Washington, EU governments, and the Western presstitutes, Putin intended no “invasion of Ukraine” or even a limited military operation. He wanted to avoid military conflict.

During the next eight years from 2014-2022 we witnessed extraordinary diplomatic efforts by Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, the two most capable diplomats of our time, to work out a mutual security agreement between the West and Russia, even including Russia as a member of NATO.

For eight years Russia got the West’s cold shoulder. In December of 2021 and January of 2022 Putin and Lavrov worked hard to secure a mutual defense agreement with the West in order to defuse the military action that Washington was forcing on Russia to defend the Donbas Russians from the large Ukrainian army Washington had built while Putin for eight years had his hopes on the Minsk Protocol. In the past year or two both the German Chancellor Merkel and the French President admitted that the Minsk Protocol was used to deceive Putin while the West built up the Ukrainian military. You can find these admissions online. Here, for example, is Merkel:

According to former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the Minsk agreement served to buy time to arm Ukraine. “The 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time,” Merkel told the weekly Die Zeit. “It also used this time to become stronger, as you can see today (December 21, 2022).”

Putin expressed his disappointment in Merkel’s confession:

Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has been disappointed by the statement of German ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel, where she claimed that the Minsk agreements of 2014 enabled Ukraine to prepare for the war with Russia. “For me, it was completely unexpected. It is disappointing. I did not expect to hear something like that from the ex-Chancellor. I always hoped that the German leadership was genuine. Yes, she was on Ukraine’s side, supporting it. But nevertheless, I genuinely hoped that German leadership expected a settlement based on the principles achieved, among other things, during the Minsk negotiations.”

The naivety Putin reveals is extraordinary. He is a babe in the woods having to contend with Satan.

Faced with an Ukrainian invasion of the Donbas republics, Putin was forced to intervene. But having foolishly trusted the West to abide by the Minsk agreement, Putin was not prepared for military action. He had to rely on a private military unit, whose professionalism embarrassed the Russian generals who came to see Yevgeny Prigozhin and the Wagner Group as the enemy instead of the West.

When a few of Prigozhin’s men marched on Moscow in protest of the high casualty manner in which the conflict was being managed and demanded the use of force to get the war over, the jealous Russian generals told Putin it was a coup attempt and by deceiving Putin achieved their aims of banning Prigozhin, later killed in a mysterious airplane crash, and incorporating the Wagner Group into the Russian army. Like generals the world over, their last concern was the conflict. Generals use wars to build empires.

The “limited military operation” was one of the worst strategic blunders in world history. It was a blunder because Putin failed to perceive that he was at war with the West and that the most desperate need was to win the war immediately before the West could get involved and step by step escalate and widen the war.

This is precisely what has happened. Everything the West affirmed would not be sent to Ukraine has been sent. The West is fully at war with Russia in Ukraine. US and NATO troops are present on the scene, providing intelligence, targeting information, battle plans. French President Macron and now other European politicians are talking about deploying NATO troops on the front lines. They argue that Russia, confronted with NATO and US troops will stop its advance in order to avoid a wider war. In other words, the argument is that introducing NATO soldiers into the conflict will lead to peace.

But peace is not what the West desires. The West has blocked every effort that Putin has made with Zelensky. The only purpose of the NATO troops is to widen the war or to intimidate Putin into withdrawing from the conflict.

This is obvious to everyone but the Russian government.

What is it that prevents the Kremlin’s recognition of reality? I can only speculate. Perhaps communist rule left Russians suspicious of their government. It was the US and not the USSR that was successful. The Soviet system was repressive, but the Americans were believed to be free. Radio Free Europe and Voice of America painted a rosy picture of Western life, a dream for Russians experiencing Soviet deprivation.

Among the Russian intellectual class the West, not Russia, was the future. The pro-Western Russian elites are known as the Atlanticist-Integrationists, a term that reflects their desire to be part of the West. I know from personal experience with them that it took events and a long time for these Atlanticist-Integrationists to wake up and realize their delusion. But for years they were a constraint on Putin, if one was needed, as Putin himself was initially besotted with the West. Putin even fell for “globalism,” a means of Western control. So did his stupid central bank director.

From the standpoint of the Atlanticist-Integrationists, the point is to avoid justifying Western suspicions of Russia caused by Putin defending Russian interests. The West would interpret decisive Russian actions in defense of Russia as “Russia rebuilding its empire.” Consequently, the Russian liberals and the youth cultivated by foreign NGO money operating in Russia unregulated imposed constraints on Putin’s ability to defend his country, even if he understood the problem, which is not clear.

Considering the vast disproportion in the military power of Russia and Ukraine even with Western armaments and untold billions of dollars, the continuation of the conflict into a third year has created the image of an irresolute Russian leadership, afraid to win in case it provokes a wider conflict. Putin and his government and his military, unlike Prigozhin, have made the strategic blunder of failing to understand that letting the conflict drag on permits the West to get increasingly involved. Whether NATO troops appear or not, the West has other means of escalating the conflict until it spins out of control.

UK defense chief, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, told the Financial Times that the latest delivery of long-range missiles to Ukraine allows Ukraine to “increase long-range attacks inside Russia” and helps Kyiv shape the war in much stronger ways.

So that you understand, the long-range missiles, which President Biden denied would ever be given to Ukraine, have been given. They are not battlefield weapons. Their use is to further embarrass Putin with inability to protect Russian civilians and infrastructure from Ukrainian attacks inside mother Russia. Clearly, Washington is doing everything it can to embarrass Putin with Russians, and Putin is playing into Washington’s hands.

Putin’s limited military operation is a total failure. Yes, Russia dominates the battle front. But by restraining the use of force Putin has created the impression that he is irresolute and an inconsequential military opponent. Even the president of France, hardly a military power, is unafraid of Russia under Putin and is willing to send French troops to fight for Ukraine against Russia.

Initially the French president was ridiculed for suggesting NATO troops be sent to Ukraine. Now others are warming to the idea.

The American president declared never would long range missiles be delivered to Ukraine, and now they have been.

As I warned, Putin’s failure to put down a heavy foot has encouraged provocation after worsening provocation, and these provocations invited by Putin’s non-response are leading to a provocation that Putin will not be able to ignore, and then the world blows up.

When will Putin understand that all he has gained from his limited military operation is a wider war, two new NATO members–Finland and Sweden–that greatly expand (more that Ukraine) Russia’s borders with NATO, and deliveries to the anti-Russian government in Ukraine of weapons unintended for the battlefield but for long distance strikes into Russia, which will make Russia look weak and Putin a failure as a war leader who is unable to protect his country?

The US Secretary of State, Blinken, was recently in China doing his best to unwind the Russian-Chinese relationship. Putin’s inability to deal with such a minor military adversary as Ukraine must make China wonder. Clearly Putin’s failure to win a war, now in its third year which he should have won in 3 weeks, provided Blinken with the opportunity to pressure China. Blinken saw the opportunity and used it. Blinken gained the support of a Chinese “Russian expert” and the ear of the Chinese government.

China itself is an ineffectual defender of its interest. Chinese thinking teaches the long run perspective. China simply waits out its opponents, but the West is immediate, which is something China doesn’t understand.

There is still no Russian-Chinese-Iranian Mutual Defense Treaty that would put a halt to Western provocations and war-making. No doubt the Russians and Chinese don’t want to be provocative. This indicates that they are incapable of realizing that they are at war.

To sum up: Putin thinks Russia has won the conflict because, despite $200 billion in US aid, Russia dominates the battlefield. Ukrainian casualties are 10 or more times Russian casualties, and the Western weapons are vastly inferior to the Russian ones. Putin thinks it is only a matter of time before the West comes to its senses and realizes it has lost and agrees to Russia’s conditions for ending the conflict. Why does Putin think that the West has any sense to come to? Putin is deceiving himself.

Putin should read Mike Whitney’s latest. Whitney has an independent uncompromised mind concerned only with the truth. Whiteny says, backed with the evidence, that the US, understanding that it has lost the battlefront war, nevertheless still intends to win the real war and has moved to Plan B. Plan B is to prolong the conflict with aid not for the lost battlefield but for long distant strikes into Russia against civilian centers and essential social and economic infrastructure. The success of these strikes will show Putin to be a failure, a leader unable to protect mother Russia from a non-existent military power–Ukraine.

Will the pro-Western Russian intellectuals seize on “Putin’s failure to protect Russia” by pushing for a peace accord that results in Ukraine’s admission to NATO?

In other words, Putin’s timidly, restraint, and miscalculations have defeated him.

Here is Whitney’s analysis of the U.S. Plan B.

Putin has been seriously damaged by the incomprehensible failure of Russian intelligence. Where, for example, was Putin when the US/Israeli trained and armed Georgian Army attacked the Russian protectorate of South Ossetia killing Russian troops serving as peace keepers? Putin was at the Chinese olympics unaware that he was faced with a dangerous crisis. Putin was recalled from his fun and games and had to use an unprepared Russian Army to repel the American/Israeli trained Georgian army. Then when he again had Georgia in Russian hands, he left, apparently leaving in exchange for a less hostile government toward Russia. Now there are reports, true or false, of another Georgian color revolution against the Georgian government that is not sufficiently hostile to Russia.

Do we have here a second war front opening against Russia in addition to Ukraine? And what about the reports that NATO is focusing on Belarus where Russian nuclear weapons are stationed if not deployed? Will a third war front open?

Russian intelligence also failed Putin when the Washington orchestrated Maiden Revolution occurred. Putin had no warning of what was happening on his doorstep. He was away, again, enjoying the Sochi Olympics while Washington took possession of Ukraine, a part of Russia for centuries.

What explains these massive total failures of Russian intelligence? Are the Russian intelligence services so pro-Western that they are incapable of seeing reality? Or are the intelligence agencies operating under a protocol in which only a happy agreement can be the result of the US orchestrated conflict between Russia and the West?

If Putin continues to deny reality, he risks losing his alliance with China. This will end dollar replacement in the settlement of international balances and leave the entirety of the dissenting world at the mercy of US financial sanctions. Can even this report from RT bring Putin to confront reality?

“Specifically, an article in The Economist by Feng Yujun, a professor at Peking University, has caused a stir. This methodical, official expert on Russia and the Ukraine conflict speaks very much in the spirit of Western political thought: he criticizes Moscow, predicts its defeat, praises Kiev for its ‘strength and unity of its resistance,’ and even suggests that if Russia doesn’t change its power structure, it will continue to threaten international security by provoking wars.

“Knowing how Chinese society is organized, it’s hard to imagine that the professor who penned this article was acting at his own risk without the support of responsible comrades in Beijing. The recent refusal of four major Chinese banks to accept payments from Russia, even in yuan, can also be seen as an alarming signal to Moscow. In other words, it may turn out that the Russian-Chinese alliance, so strong in words, is far from being effective and trouble-free in practice. And Blinken would certainly have tried to consolidate this trend.”

Clearly, Putin has no economic and political advisers with sufficient intelligence and awareness to tell him the dangerous situation he has created for himself and for Russia. And for the world, as the consequence will be nuclear war.

About Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. He is chairman of The Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Roberts has held academic appointments at Virginia Tech, Tulane University, University of New Mexico, Stanford University where he was Senior Research Fellow in the Hoover Institution, George Mason University where he had a joint appointment as professor of economics and professor of business administration, and Georgetown University where he held the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy in the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Read more.

©2024. . All rights reserved.

POST ON X: 

Do not take your eyes off Ukraine: It’s still the most likely to trigger WWIII

This guest post by Jim Rickards is spot on in its analysis of the Russia-Ukraine war and its potential to explode into something much bigger. He spells out the falsehoods embedded in the Western position toward Russia and why the continued pushing of this false narrative cannot have a good outcome. Either someone with sound logic steps up or we are heading up the escalation ladder to a point of no return, and that will bring catastrophic consequences to the people of the West — you and me.


Ukraine’s Starting to Get Dangerous

By Jim Rickards, at The Daily Reckoning

A lot of people seem to have forgotten about the war in Ukraine. That’s a mistake.

Russia is slowly but steadily defeating Ukraine, which is becoming increasingly obvious to everyone except the most anti-Russian diehards.

That’s leading to desperation in elite Western circles determined to stop Russia one way or the other. In their minds, they simply can’t let Putin win. They think that if Putin wins in Ukraine, he’ll next move on to the Baltic states, Poland and elsewhere.

You know the West is getting desperate based on recent threats by France’s Emmanuel Macron to send troops to Ukraine.

The vice president of the Russia Duma, Pyotr Tolstoy (descendant of the great Russian writer Leo Tolstoy), warned that French troops would be priority targets for Russian forces if they entered Ukraine.

Even though France would send troops independent of NATO, that puts us on a very dangerous path that ultimately leads to direct conflict between NATO and Russia. And that path ends, ultimately, in nuclear war.

Tolstoy added that it would take “just two minutes to nuke Paris.” It’s not hard to envision how quickly things could escalate if France decided to send troops to Ukraine.

More Escalation

Meanwhile, NATO is preparing to send F-16s to Ukraine. Airfields in Ukraine are highly vulnerable to Russian attack, especially since Ukraine’s air defenses are heavily depleted at this point and the Russian air force is becoming increasingly active in Ukraine.

But if NATO allows the F-16s to be based on its own airbases, Putin has warned that these airfields would become a “legitimate target” if strikes against Russian forces were launched from them.

By the way, Russia has hypersonic missiles that NATO has no practical ability to shoot down, so these attacks would likely be successful. Of course, NATO would have to retaliate in kind. You can imagine where all this could lead.

We’re already well along the escalation ladder. And the higher you go, the more face you stand to lose if you back down. I warned about that from the outset of the war.

But the entire notion that Russia poses some existential threat to NATO or Europe is absurd.

Putin Has Nothing to Gain and Everything to Lose

First off, the theory that Putin will invade other countries if he wins in Ukraine is nonsense. The Russian army lacks the men and materiel to occupy Ukraine while simultaneously invading other countries.

This isn’t the Soviet Union with its massive tank armies poised to roll over Western Europe. And Soviet communism is long dead, so there’s no ideological basis for Russia to invade Europe. These days Russia is a conservative, Orthodox Christian nation.

But more importantly, Putin has absolutely no incentive to invade any of these nations, which are NATO members. What do they have that he wants?

All it would do is trigger Article 5 of the NATO Charter, which stipulates that an attack on one member is an attack on all, inviting a massive NATO response. At that point, you’re on the fast track to nuclear war.

Putin is fully aware of that.

Fearmongers like to point to what Putin once said in a speech: “Whoever doesn’t miss the Soviet Union doesn’t have a heart.”

They take that as proof that he wants to recreate the Soviet Union. But they conveniently omit what he said next:

“Whoever wants it back doesn’t have a brain.”

Whatever you think of Putin, he definitely has a brain. He has no intention to restore the Soviet Union.

It’s Not Just About Intentions

But like any great power, Russia has interests, and Ukraine has always been a vital strategic interest to Russia.

And Russia is not going to tolerate Ukraine joining a NATO alliance that’s hostile to Russia. Critics say Ukraine is a free and independent nation that can join NATO if it wants. Russia has no say in the matter, even though Ukraine borders Russia.

Well, I guess they never heard of the Monroe Doctrine. The U.S. basically declared the entire Western hemisphere its own domain. But a great power like Russia can’t have a say in its own backyard?

Critics also say that the idea of NATO invading Russia is ridiculous. That’s just Russian paranoia. And that’s true, NATO isn’t going to actually invade Russia. But it’s not just intentions that count in the world of geopolitics. It’s also capabilities.

As Bismarck once noted: “What matters in politics is capabilities, not intentions. Intentions change, capabilities remain.”

Given Russia’s long history of being invaded, it’s not hard to imagine why it might seem a bit paranoid of exterior threats.

If you look at a map, parts of Ukraine are actually east of Moscow.

Will the U.S. Keep the War Going?

Of course, Ukraine can’t continue fighting without U.S. assistance. The Biden White House wants $60 billion of new money to give to Ukraine to fight the war. This is on top of several hundred billion already provided.

This was proposed last summer but has stalled in the Senate and House of Representatives ever since. The House passed a separate bill to aid Israel last fall, but the Senate refused to take it up because they want to tie that aid to money for Ukraine.

The Senate passed a bill that would provide aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan in one package combined with some money for phony border security.

That bill was so unpopular it could not even make it out of the Senate. Then the House insisted on passing regular appropriations before considering Ukraine.

That process was completed on March 23, but now Congress is on a two-week Easter recess so nothing further will happen until mid-April. No one has even answered the most important question, which is what would Ukraine do with the money.

They can’t buy badly needed 155mm artillery shells because the Western arsenals are bare and factories are not geared to make more than a handful. It will take years to expand that manufacturing capacity.

You can walk into a store with a wallet full of $100 bills, but if the shelves are empty, it doesn’t do you any good. The products simply aren’t there.

Meanwhile, wonder weapons from the West such as tanks, cruise missiles, armored personnel carriers, HIMARS precision-guided artillery and anti-missile batteries have all been destroyed, disabled or shot down by Russia.

The war in Ukraine hasn’t been good advertising for Western weapons.

Fallout

To repeat what I said earlier, Ukraine is losing the war badly. Russia is advancing on the southern and eastern fronts in Ukraine.

Still, the pressure on House Speaker Mike Johnson to do something remains. The Republican warmongers in the Senate like Lindsey Graham and Joni Ernst won’t let up. Many Republicans in the House such as Chip Roy and Marjorie Taylor Greene are opposed to Johnson on this.

Incredibly, Johnson may respond to the pressure with a solution worse than an outright appropriation. He may get behind efforts to steal $300 billion in Russian central bank assets held in the form of U.S. Treasury securities.

That would destroy confidence in the U.S. dollar, U.S. Treasury securities and the U.S. rule of law. Russia would quickly recover the loss by seizing $300 billion or more of Western assets still in Russia. No one in Congress seems to understand any of this.

If they follow through, the economic fallout would be bad enough. But if this war doesn’t stop soon, we could ultimately be looking at nuclear fallout.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Oct 7th Coming to the USA?

U.S. Army BG (Ret.) John Adams: Will Biden Administration continue support or obstruct Israel’s victory over Hamas in Gaza?

Jerry Gordon, a Senior Editor of The New English Review, invited retired U.S. Army Brigadier General John Adams (Ret.) for this fourth in a series of discussions on Israel Defense Force military doctrine and strategic options in the conduct of the Jewish state’s civilizational war with Iran-backed Hamas terrorist group in Gaza. He addresses the conflict given his extensive background as a 30-year veteran of combat, staff and international military diplomatic assignments and post-service informal analysis and discussions with former Senior IDF commanders.

Among the issues covered in this wide-ranging discussion are:

  1. Biden Administration attempts to force Israel to “scale down” Gaza operations conflicts with IDF objective of destroying and displacing jihadist Hamas.
  2. Biden Administration “day after” two state solution, modeled on failed 1993 Oslo Accords, is rejected by the Netanyahu government because of national security concerns. PLO – Fatah was routed by Hamas in 2006 Gaza elections and both groups share same objective: destruction of Jewish state.
  3. Discovery of massive Hamas tunnel near Israeli Erez Gaza crossings and failure of border high tech Iron Wall in Hamas breach on October 7th – Israel’s “Maginot Line” – are priorities to be investigated in post-conflict intelligence failures investigation.
  4. Hamas discussions with Egyptian intelligence on new round of pauses include release of 40 to 50 of remaining Israeli captive in exchange for longer pause and increased humanitarian aid and release of Israeli Palestinian security prisoners.
  5. Other “Day After” solutions reviewed include “One State” proposal by noted Israeli geo-political commentator Caroline Glick based on Arab Clan governance of municipalities and pathway to Israeli citizenship and New State proposal of former Senior IDF officers- an expansion of Gaza into Egyptian Sinai – “Singapore” on Mediterranean Coast.
  6. Iran is behind proxy Yemen’s Houthi rebel drone and ballistic missile attacks in support of Hamas in Gaza threaten global war and maritime risks in Red Sea and transit via Suez Canal. USS Destroyer Carney successfully repulsed Houthi drone and missile attacks.  Defense Secretary Austin announced formation of international maritime task force in Operation Prosperity Guardians composed of US, Britain, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles and Spain.
  7. Iran is also behind Hizballah as it threatens rocket and precision guided missile barrages to northern and central Israel. Hizballah has an inventory of upwards of 150,00 rickets and missiles. The IDF has conducted air attacks, in response to rocket and mortar attacks. Israel has evacuated an estimated 200,000 from both northern and southern communities. Defense Minister Gallant announced possible limited incursion of 18 kilometers to Litani river in Southern Lebanon to destroy Hizballah positions. The Biden Administration maintains one US Navy Carrier Battle Group offshore Lebanon (another CBG is in the Persian Gulf) to prevent a widening war in the Middle East.
  8. Israel needs to complete its mission of destroying or displacing Hamas without significant delays to avoid rising costs to its economy.

WATCH: Will Biden Administration continue support or obstruct Israel victory over Hamas in Gaza War?

About BG John Adams, USA (Ret.)

Brigadier General John Adams retired from the US Army in September 2007. Currently an independent defense consultant, he is also studying toward a PhD in Political Science at the University of Arizona, with a research focus on European security institutions. His final military assignment was as Deputy United States Military Representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Military Committee in Brussels, Belgium, the highest military authority of NATO. He worked closely with military representatives of NATO and Partnership for Peace member nations to develop policy recommendations for the political authorities of the Alliance, and helped coordinate the transfer of authority in Afghanistan from US to NATO control.

Born and raised in the Washington, DC, area, General Adams was a Distinguished Military Graduate and received a Regular Army commission from North Carolina State University Army ROTC in 1976. As a Foreign Area Officer, Military Intelligence Officer, and Army Aviator, his more than thirty years of service in command and staff assignments includes nearly eighteen years in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, including assignments with US Embassies in Belgium (1994-1997), Rwanda (1996), Croatia (1998-2001), and South Korea (2002-2003), where as an Army Foreign Area Officer and military attaché, he provided political-military advice to US Ambassadors, combatant commanders, US Government authorities in Washington, visiting US Government delegations, and represented the United States with foreign government officials regarding national and regional issues. As an Army Aviator, he has more than 700 hours as pilot-in-command in fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft including the UH-1D, OV/RV-1D Mohawk, and RU-21 Guardrail Special Electronic Mission Aircraft.

On September 11, 2001, he was stationed at the Pentagon as Deputy Director for European Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and directly participated in immediate disaster recovery operations at the crash site as well as coordinated international support for the US diplomatic and military response. He is a veteran of Operation Desert Storm (1991), Operation Guardian Assistance in Rwanda (1996), and served and traveled extensively on official business throughout the Balkans from 1998-2003. He traveled on temporary duty to both Iraq and Afghanistan in 2004.

General Adams holds Masters in International Relations (Boston University), English (University of Massachusetts), and Strategic Studies (US Army War College). He taught English at West Point from 1988-90. He is proficient in French, Dutch, German, and Croatian.

John and his wife, Laura Magan MD, make their home in Tucson. They enjoy sailing, hiking, and cooking. He has two daughters, the oldest who graduated from the College of William and Mary in 2008 and now works as a program coordinator with Operation Smile in Norfolk, Virginia, and the youngest who is a senior at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia.

©2023. Jerry Gordon. All rights reserved.

‘Complicated’: Over 100 Harvard Faculty Defend ‘From The River To The Sea’

Over 100 Harvard faculty members signed a letter saying the phrase “from the river to the sea” is “complicated” in response to the president’s recent statement on antisemitism.

Harvard President Claudine Gay wrote multiple statements about the antisemitism on campus following backlash from donors and fire from former grads about her response to antisemitism on campus after the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks, including a new statement on Thursday denouncing the phrase “from the river to the sea,” which has genocidal implications. A letter signed by many Harvard faculty members claimed that “pressure from donors” is racist and that condemning the phrase “from the river to the sea” is the wrong decision.

“As Harvard faculty, we have been astonished by the pressure from donors, alumni, and even some on this campus to silence faculty, students, and staff critical of the actions of the State of Israel. It is important to acknowledge the patronizing tone and format of much of the criticism you have received as well as the outright racism contained in some of it,” the letter reads.

‘The signatories are the usual suspects from the anti Israel woke hard left. Their one sided screed is part of the problem, not part of any reasonable resolution. I doubt that many of them would sign a letter in support of the free speech of such ‘complex ‘ issues as racism, sexism, homophobia or Islamophobia. Their double standard against Israel is obvious,” former Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Student protests across the U.S. have used the phrase “from the river to the sea” as well as other anti-Israel slogans. Harvard University, Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania implemented antisemitism task forces to address antisemitism on campus following the Hamas terrorist attacks.

Democratic Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib previously reposted a tweet with the phrase “From the river to the sea” and has made other anti-Israel comments. The House voted to censure Tlaib on Nov. 7 over anti-Israel comments made following the terrorist attacks.

“The phrase ‘from the river to the sea, Palestine must be free’ has a long and complicated history. Its interpretation deserves, and is receiving, sustained and ongoing inquiry and debate,” the letter reads.

The letter goes on to call the choice to denounce the phrase “imprudent” and a misjudged “act of moral leadership.” “It might be framed in the language of liberation, but it calls for the destruction of Israel,” professor Norman Goda, Norman and Irma Braman Professor of Holocaust Studies at the University of Florida, told the DCNF.

Harvard did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

BRANDON POULTER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

MEF Investigation Exposes Hamas Funders in America

Biden Admin Unveils New Tools To Counter Antisemitism, Islamophobia In Schools

Elite Universities That Are Hotbeds For Pro-Hamas Activism Got Billions In Federal Grants, Tax Benefits

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

There is No Moderate Jihad

And that’s why co-existence is impossible.

Civilized nations have spent generations trying to convince themselves that the primary religious and national impulses of the Muslim world come down to more than conquest and mass murder.

The horrors of the past few years in Afghanistan and Israel both came down to the mistaken belief that you could negotiate and reach an agreement with Jihadist movements.

Both D.C. and Jerusalem had become enchanted with diplomatic initiatives to the Muslim world, from the Abraham Accords to two years of relative peace with Hamas, politicians, generals and diplomats were convinced that they had finally unlocked the secret of coexistence.

But there’s no perpetual motion machine, no diet that lets you eat what you want and no coexistence with an ideology that is built on conquering and destroying all outsiders.

Individually, contextually and circumstantially coexistence is possible. But not in the long run.

How long that long run is depends not on building relationships, but showing strength. Civilized people treat coexistence as a means of developing bonds but the other side uses periods of coexistence to test for weaknesses. Coexistence on their side is a wholly insincere façade, no matter how authentic it may appear, that gathers information to be used when the attack comes.

Israeli Kibbutz residents thought that they were building relationships with day laborers from Gaza. They chatted about life, their kids and their various hardships. Then those same laborers returned to kill, rape and abduct them. But that is how that was always going to end.

That is how it will end for us with the millions of immigrants that we have taken into our nations.

It is a fundamental error to view Hamas as an “extremist” group. It is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood whose political parties rule a number of Muslim countries. Its political organizations also dominate Muslim communities in America and Europe. Most of Al Qaeda’s leaders were also members of the Muslim Brotherhood. The myth of a split between political Islam and militant Islam, between moderate and extreme Islamic movements was always just that.

As Erdogan, the brutal Islamist tyrant who became the poster boy for moderate Islam said, “Islam cannot be either ‘moderate’ or ‘not moderate.’ Islam can only be one thing.” He has since, despite previous claims of turning more moderate and rebuilding relationships, renewed his support for Hamas, and threatened western nations with a Jihad against the “crusaders”.

The trouble with all the dreams of coexistence is that Islam is Jihad and Jihad is Islam. The most fundamental external expression of Islam is a drive to conquer the entire world, not in some uncertain ‘end of days’ future, but here, now and in the present. The difference between the so-called moderates and extremists comes down to quibbling over when and how that conquest is to begin, where it is to be implemented and who is to take charge of it.

But the actual conquest is an ongoing project. Every Islamic war, whether against Muslims or non-Muslims, is waged as part of an agenda of global conquest. Muslim civil wars are waged between different factions under the banner of Islamic leadership. And the purpose of Islamic leadership is to impose Islamic law in its lands and then invade other lands to impose the same brutal theocratic repression there.

The Jihad is the defining force of Islamic political and religious life. Much as with Communism, coexistence with it is impossible. It was impossible to coexist with members of a movement that believed in conquering and subjugating everyone under the red flag and the little red book. Individually you could chat with a Communist or help them with their groceries, but the ideology doomed any long term relationship with someone who wanted you dead or as a slave.

This was a difficult lesson that we never learned during the Cold War. Is it any wonder that we’re incapable of grasping this concept now when our civilization’s future is once again on the line?

The Cold War was fought on the optimistic premise that everyone wanted the same things we did, and that once we taught them to want them, they would adopt our means of getting them. Convince Communists that color TVs were fun and they become democratic capitalists. What sounded like a good argument to us has failed in every country that it’s been tried, except those that, like Japan and Germany, were originally democratic and capitalist. Instead we convinced China that it should make and sell us the TVs and use the money to build up its military, and convinced the Muslim world to move here, kill us and take the TVs.

We are not the world and the world is not us. Not all religions, cultures and countries are alike. Most have things that they believe in every bit as strongly as our fanciful belief that all people are basically good and that if we could just get them in a room, we would agree on most things. That’s what we did with multiculturalism and it’s why we now have violent riots every few years because we don’t agree on basic things like what we want out of life or how we treat each other.

That’s why we should not delude ourselves into thinking that the Jihad is a fringe, the misbehavior of a tiny minority, and that even that tiny minority doesn’t really buy into it. Every religion and movement has its hypocrites, but the belief that the world must be purified by Islam is as sincerely held by the majority of its believers as by those who fought for Communism. That is the religious impulse, more than any other, at the heart of Islam and its promise to Muslims.

Each religion has elements that make it exceptional. What makes Islam exceptional is not the collection of beliefs, scriptures and rituals often cribbed from Judaism and Christianity, but what it offers that these religions do not, an imminent redemption of the world achieved not in the distant future, but in the present day through the violent actions of its followers. That, and not borrowed scripture and ritual, is what allowed Islam to defeat Jews and Christians.

Western nations view this as ancient history while Muslims see it as an enduring struggle. That is why they talk, as Erdogan does, about “crusaders” and taunt the Jews with the massacre of Khaybar by Mohammed’s bandits. Convinced that history can never repeat itself, we dismiss the idea that it’s relevant or that the people we are dealing with are serious about bringing it back.

Civilized people are shocked by the horrors that ISIS, Boko Haram or Hamas perpetrate because they refuse to learn history or to see how it might be relevant to current events. It’s fashionable to draw a line, whether it’s 5 minutes ago or in 1967, and begin the clock from there. Why is this happening, they wonder, as if this had not been the longstanding practice of Islamic armies to behead fallen enemies, mutilate bodies or to rape women for over a thousand years. They assume without a shred of evidence that such practices must have been abolished.

What we are experiencing is not a reaction to anything we did. It has nothing to do with our views on a ‘Palestinian’ state, whether we draw Mohammed or welcome refugees. The Jihad is the founding religious impulse of Islam with over a thousand years of history behind it. The Jihad not only predates the United States of America and the rebirth of Israel, but dates back to a name when pagan kings ruled the various parts of England. It predates colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, globalism, the dollar, WWI and the Carter administration.

The Jihad made Islam possible. It is also what gives it meaning. It is the precarious reality that colors all relationships with the Muslim world. We have learned to ignore it at our own risk. And every time we unsee it, people die. They die by the dozens, the hundreds and the thousands. And the killing and the dying happen because we mistake what is at best a Cold War for a rich relationship. We think that we are building bridges when we’re really welcoming invaders.

To survive, we need to see all the things that we’ve been unseeing. We have to recognize that these horrors are not aberrations, they are the norm. It’s the pleasantries and periods of coexistence that are the aberration. It’s not a problem we can negotiate away. It’s not solvable by spreading democracy or building up trade relationships. The only reason we weren’t living with these horrors on an everyday basis is that the Western world became too powerful to have our coastlines and ships raided for slaves as used to be common practice in the past.

What the Muslim world and it leftist allies call “imperialism” and “colonialism” meant that kidnapped European women stopped showing up in the harems of the Ottoman Caliphate and European children as slaves in his armies. It also meant that the Jews were able to rebuild their country and, briefly, Christians in the region were also able to freely lift their heads again. We forgot that we had become strong to stop ourselves from falling victim to the endless Jihad. And our sons and daughters came to sympathize with former enemies who would rape and kill them.

Now we have made ourselves weak and the horrors are returning. We struggle to coexist with those who want to kill us. And then we wonder why they keep killing us. There’s our answer.

Coexistence is death, resistance is life. Until we learn to stop coexisting with our killers, they will go on killing us. All else is an illusion. A fantasy that we keep feeding ourselves. There is no moderate Islam because there is no moderate Jihad. And there is no moderate Jihad because there is no moderate way to conquer and enslave non-Muslims. Islam is a state of perpetual war. To know Islam is to never know peace. We coexist with Islam and so we are at war.

AUTHOR

RELATED POSTS ON X:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Photographers Without Borders: AP & Reuters Pictures of Hamas Atrocities Raise Ethical Questions

Muslim Girl At London Protest Calls For Killing All Jews

Yemeni Muslim politician: ‘Our mobilization is one of jihad for the sake of Allah,’ calls on Putin to strike Israel

France: Muslim on terror watch list for ‘Islamist radicalization’ had submachine gun, was preparing jihad massacre

Is Congress Ready to Take on Pro-Hamas Nonprofits?

DSA-Linked Group Tries to Organize Protest Against Holocaust Museum Screening Hamas Atrocities

After Turkish Muslim Assaults Jewish Students, UMass Administrators Defend Anti-Israel Hate

RELATED VIDEO: Daniel Greenfield: “Hamas attacked under a CEASEFIRE

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

THE WAR ON X: WW III • The Global War Against Islamic Terrorism — Day 16

Today October 23rd, 2023 we are now seeing the violence that Hamas began 16 days ago is now spreading like wild fire across the Middle East, Europe and in America.

Demonstrations, some violent, are being led by supporters of Hamas. This is the global Islamic jihad we have been predicating for years.

Here are some of the top headlines for today:

These tweet on X say it all.

This interview with Brother Rachid was taped on Friday, October 21st for RAIR Foundation and the story can be read here. Brother Rachid has a wildly popular TV show in the Arabic World where be brings people out of Islam and into Christianity.

WATCH: EXCLUSIVE With Hunted Islamic Expert Brother Rachid: ‘Muslims Will Be the Majority, They Will Govern the West’

WW III • The Global War Against Islamic Terrorism

©2023. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Anguished Families Cling to Hope that Hamas Hostages Will Be Found

“I can’t describe such a moment in words where you watch your whole family get taken away from you,” Yoni Asher tried to explain. Summoning the courage to keep talking, he looked around the room of diplomats, U.N. officials, and other suffering families, and put himself back in the moment where his world changed forever.

“My wife was visiting her mother at one of the kibbutzim, and I stayed home,” Yoni stopped, as he probably had a million times in the last week, to let his decision sink in. “I got a phone call from my wife,” who was, “scared — scared,” he repeated, “whispering, terrif[ied], saying that she’s hearing gunshots and people are entering the house.” It wasn’t until later that he saw the video of his wife and two daughters on one of Hamas’s cars or trucks. “I recognized them,” Yoni said quietly of his two little girls, Raz and Aviv, and his wife, Doron.

As the tears fell freely down his face, Yoni finally got out the words that thousands of tortured families have said since October 7: “I woke up to the worst nightmare of my life.”

Others, like Yakov Argamani, pace around their houses, clutching a book of psalms. Surrounded by memories, he mourns that his beautiful teenage daughter’s smell is gone from the room. “Noa was here, there, everywhere,” he told The New York Times’s Jeffrey Gettleman. “All of a sudden, it’s gone. And I’m lost,” the broken father laments.

Other dads, like Hen Avigdori, try to comfort the one child who’s left — while slipping away to cry for his son’s missing sister and mom. “I’m in this endless loop of hope and despair, hope and despair,” he said. “I need some proof of life. I need to know where my wife and daughter are.”

From Thailand to France and America, the families of the 199 missing hostages are in an aching form of limbo. Between television interviews and underground meetings with government officials in Tel Aviv, they live hour to hour, haunted by their last conversations and the knowledge of what Hamas is capable of. To so many, captivity is a fate worse than death. As one heartbroken father told reporters, realizing his eight-year-old little girl had been killed was better than thinking of her in the terrorists’ hands. “It’s a blessing,” an emotional Thomas Hend told CNN the moment he learned Emily’s fate. “She was either dead or in Gaza,” he said after the 48-hour search. “And if you know anything about what they do in Gaza, that is worse than death.”

The number held by Hamas, which Israeli officials increased to almost 200 over the weekend, is complicating things for the soldiers on the ground. While teams of military teams search the 30-mile Gaza strip, terrorist Abu Obeida warned that his men have scattered the hostages — babies, grandmothers, young women, newly orphaned children, and soldiers — in “safe places and the tunnels of resistance” all throughout the area.

Brigadier General Daniel Hagari, a top Israeli military spokesman, insisted they have information on the location of the captives and sought to reassure families that the troops “will not carry out an attack that would endanger our people.” In the meantime, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, issued a stunning declaration, offering himself to Hamas if the terrorists would let the child hostages go. “I am ready for an exchange, anything, if this can lead to freedom, to bring the children home.”

Countless parents at the makeshift headquarters of the Families of Hostages and Missing Persons Forum would almost certainly do the same. “All we have been told is that her phone is in Gaza,” Meirav Gonen said helplessly. Romi, who was kidnapped from the music festival, stayed on the line with her mom for almost 45 minutes until her phone went dead.

“I know she was shot,” Meirav explained. “She called me at 10:15 and I was on with her until 10:58, she was fading away and I heard shooting around her coming closer to the car and then people shouting in Arabic … shouting she was alive and that they need her.”

Romi’s face is one of many lining the wall of Tel Aviv’s HaKirya government building, a horrifying reminder of the dozens of missing. “It’s so, so lonely,” Meirav chokes up. “All the thoughts and feelings that you have once you stop for a minute to listen to them.”

Lt. General (Ret.) Jerry Boykin understands the pain of hostage crises more than most. As commander of the Army’s elite Delta Force, he was one of the leaders on the failed mission to rescue Iran’s hostages in 1980. Like so many veterans, he knows the incredible lengths America will go to bring its people home. “I think most of what you see, other than the bombing and the shelling by the Israelis … is reconnaissance to try to locate the hostages,” he explained to guest host and former Congressman Jody Hice on “Washington Watch.” “This is a big issue for the Israelis because there are Americans being held. And I can assure that those people on the ground in [Gaza] include some Americans, our special operations that are experts at hostage rescue.”

But, Boykin warned, “the key thing to hostage rescue is good intelligence, and I think that’s what they’re doing [in Gaza right now]. … They’re in there looking for the hostages. And I pray that they will find them before the end of this campaign … because ultimately,” he said soberly, “these people will be killed if we can’t find them in time.”

White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby was cagey on Sunday about the involvement of U.S. special ops, saying only that the military “won’t rule anything in or out” about the hostage effort on the ground.

For now, Boykin insisted, the world needs to keep its eye on the ball. All of this, he argued, “is on the backs of Hamas.” “Hamas is responsible for everything that has happened up to this point. There is nothing, no one killed, nothing that Hamas is not responsible for. And we have to remember that. … What has happened here is a terrible, brutal, even demonic attack on the Israelis. … And we stand with the Jews.”

More than that, we pray for the Jews — and everyone affected by this unspeakable tragedy. For a partial list of hostages to remember in prayer, visit Pray for Israel by Name and join us in asking for God’s continued blanket of peace and protection on the innocents in the grip of Hamas.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Could Americans Face Nuclear Attack Because of Syria?

TUCSON, Ariz. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — U.S. and Russian aircraft could literally be on a collision course in Syria, as the two countries have not agreed on flight safety rules in Syrian airspace. U.S. pilots are under orders to change their flight path if a Russian plane is within 20 nautical miles, according to a CNN report.

Americans who lived through the Cold War may recall the novel Alas, Babylon, in which a worldwide nuclear conflagration resulted from an accident caused by a low-level military officer. At that time, people were knowledgeable about nuclear weapons effects, and the U.S. had a civil defense program, notes Physicians for Civil Defense president Jane M. Orient, M.D. Today, there would be millions of avoidable casualties.

What will happen if there is an accident in Syria? During the decades of Mutual Assured Destruction, nuclear-armed states were cautious about provocations, confining their interference and bombing to nonnuclear states. But now, the U.S. and Russia are at odds in Syria. Both claim to be fighting ISIS; however, aggressive Russian air attacks, plus missile attacks from warships in the Caspian Sea, are also claimed to be directed against U.S. supported “moderates” who are trying to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Russia supports Assad.

Russia is apparently seeking to replace the U.S. as the dominant force in the Middle East. And tensions are also growing outside Syria. Russian president Putin states that Moscow may boost its western forces in response to NATO’s moving troops and storing heavy equipment along the Russian border. He announced thatRussia will be deploying more than 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles in 2015.

These are very dangerous times, Orient states. Yet the presidential candidates are mostly ignoring the strategic circumstances.

GOP candidate Ben Carson emphasized the importance of understanding the geopolitical situation. That is complex and obscure to most Americans. However, the state of the vulnerability of American civilians, Orient emphasizes, is simple and undeniable. As threats grow and proliferate, the only civil defense in today’s America is self-help.

Probably the most important measure is to drop to the ground and take the best available cover if you see a bright flash. This and other information on a 60-second training card could save millions.

Physicians for Civil Defense distributes information to help to save lives in the event of war or other disaster.

PODCAST: Obama’s Policies in the Middle East Destablizing World Security

I recently did a talk radio interview with former U.S. Federal Judge Joe Miller, USMA ‘89, the host of the Joe Miller Show. As a former counter terrorist intelligence operative who was on the DOD Task Force after 9/11 which reported to the Assistant Secretary of the Army, I served in nine counter-terrorist operations, was recruited as an Arabic linguist by Special Warfare Group ONE in order to deploy with SEAL Team ONE, was an armed Federal Law Enforcement Officer in DHS, and was assigned as an Intelligent Analyst in the FBI after graduating from the FBI Academy in Quantico.

Listen to my interview on the Joe Miller Show:

I voiced my concern that for the past 6 years, the Obama administration’s policies in the Middle East have been destructive for the stability of the region. The Obama administration’s foreign policy has shifted support from the United States’ 60 year traditional alliance with friendly Sunni countries (Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates) to Iran, the world’s number one major sponsor of terrorism with Shite ruling class. Iran regularly declares that it is enemy of the “Great Satan”, the United States, who has been killing and maiming thousands of members of the US Armed Forces for 36 years.

The Obama administration’s absence of a foreign policy in the Middle East has resulted in Iran filling the void by taking control of Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon with Afghanistan and Bahrain in their gun sights.

The Obama administration’s policies toward Iran has been facilitating Iran’s development of nuclear weapons for the last two years. The foreign policy of the Obama administration continues to embrace the terrorist state of Iran, while continuing to reject military aide for friendly Sunnis countries in the Middle East (the request for urgent military aide for Jordan, Egypt, Kurdistan, and the Assyrian Militia have been denied).

If the Obama administration’s nuclear negotiations permits Iran to continue the development of nuclear weapons and eventually obtain nuclear weapons, that agreement will result in a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, and might set the stage for Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities, which might result in the outbreak of World War III.