America's Survival, Inc.
  • Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • Give
  • Contact
  • Archives

The Biden Doctrine of Demoralization and Defeat

2/2/2023

1 Comment

 
Picture


​



















​The Biden Doctrine of Demoralization and Defeat

 
By Cliff Kincaid
 
While advocating more weapons for Ukraine, former Obama official Michael McFaul says in a Foreign Affairs article “In return for receiving these weapons, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy could sign a legally binding agreement to not use these weapons to strike targets inside Russia.” There you have it, in clear precise terms: Ukraine is not being permitted to win.
 
This is another no-win war that the American foreign policy establishment wants fought in such a way as to guarantee defeat for those whose country was invaded.
 
If the experts at the Council on Foreign Relations have their way, Ukraine will have to settle for a bombed-out country and the corporate and financial elites will resume business-as-usual with a KGB regime in Moscow determined to resurrect the Soviet empire.  
 
Not surprisingly, supporters of Ukraine are coming to the conclusion that, under Joe Biden, Ukraine isn't supposed to win but to bleed and then negotiate and certify Russia’s capture of eastern Ukraine and Crimea. That means Russia wins, and it can set its sights on other countries, such as anti-communist Poland.
 
Joe Biden, you’re no Ronald Reagan.
 
Reagan, who fought communists in Hollywood and understood their strategy and tactics, had a Reagan Doctrine as president to overthrow communist and enemy regimes. But with his declaration that the U.S. will not send advanced F-16s to Ukraine, despite repeated requests, we have a new “Biden Doctrine” of demoralization and defeat.
 
Meanwhile, the United Nations, functioning as a communist front, does nothing about the illegal North Korean nuclear weapons program while China Joe refuses to consider re-deployment of nuclear weapons to South Korea to counter the communist threat. South Korea’s conservative ruling People Power Party will have to consider building nuclear weapons of its own.  
 
Disarming Ukraine
 
In regard to Ukraine, McFaul’s proposal for a “legally binding agreement” prohibiting military action against Vladimir Putin’s KGB regime is another sell-out that allows Russia, China, and its allies to remain on the military offensive around the world.
 
This approach reminds us of the Budapest Memorandum devised under Democratic President Bill Clinton that returned Ukraine’s nuclear weapons to Moscow. In return, Ukraine’s independence was supposed to be guaranteed by the U.S., Britain, and Russia.
 
Ukraine was disarmed, but this was predictably followed by a Russian invasion.
 
Advocating more appeasement of Moscow, McFaul wants Ukraine to promise not to take the fight to Russia, a primary source of global conflict and instability since its communist revolution in 1917.
 
McFaul’s “advice” has to be regarded as suspect because his credentials include serving for five years in the Obama administration, from 2012 to 2014 as U.S. Ambassador to Russia. The first invasion of Ukraine occurred under Obama in 2014 and the second under Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden, in 2022.
 
The Obama/Biden policies have brought the world to this point.
 
After the invasion in 2014, Obama/Biden authorized a pathetic aid package for Ukraine that featured radios, patrol boats, body armor, helmets, blankets, and night-vision goggles. He “stuck to his refusal to provide weapons or other lethal military gear to Ukraine,” as noted by the Wall Street Journal at the time.
 
“What was democratic President Obama’s position in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014?” asks foreign policy writer and Ukraine supporter Victor Rud. Obama’s position was that “We do very little trade with Ukraine and geopolitically what happens in Ukraine doesn’t pose a threat to us.” This statement captures the mindset of those who made Russia’s aggression possible and who continue to make excuses for Russia’s war crimes today.
 
Trump’s Approach
 
With the 2022 invasion approaching its first anniversary on February 24, former President Trump says in a new video, “I think we helped lead Russia into that war by saying, well, if they took a small part of the country that would be okay. Such a tragic waste of human life.” He was referring to Biden’s statement before the war that NATO was divided on what to do if Russia launched a “minor incursion.”
 
McFaul’s recommendations for weapons are better than nothing, since there are some ostensibly pro-Trump Republicans, such as Stephen K. Bannon, who oppose any aid to Ukraine. Bannon has achieved a national platform against Ukraine through a channel called Real America’s Voice and Mike Lindell’s Frank Speech network and has financial connections to a controversial Chinese billionaire allegedly linked to Chinese officials by the name of Miles Guo.
 
Bannon comes across as a war hawk on China and Taiwan, saying America has a national interest there, but dismisses the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a “regional conflict.” He is part of a group of “conservatives” hoping to dominate the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
 
“Take down the Chinese Communist Party” is Bannon’s war cry, with an opening commercial featuring Miles Guo petting his cat on a yacht. It is truly bizarre.
 
The Reagan Doctrine
 
The real conservative position, dating back to the period of Ronald Reagan, is to support freedom fighters and anti-communist regimes around the globe. I attended several of CPAC gatherings in the 1980s when Reagan was the featured speaker and spoke of the evils of communism. Today, unfortunately, some in the MAGA movement speak approvingly of Putin and his KGB associates. 
 
“By bending their knee to Putin,” Victor Rudd says of Stephen K. Bannon, Tucker Carlson, and their ilk, “they accept his caterwauling that the fall of the USSR was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century.”
 
True conservatives are being given a false choice -- Michael McFaul’s limited support option for Ukraine, under certain circumstances, or the Stephen K. Bannon approach of leaving the country completely at the mercy of Putin’s KGB regime.
 
McFaul’s article is somewhat helpful in the sense that he lists many different weapons systems that Ukraine desperately needs for national survival and hasn’t received. But he insists these only be used for defensive purposes. That’s a recipe for more bloodshed and a Russian victory. 
 
To understand this approach, remember that Joe Biden, since his Senate days, has been an advocate of a New World Order and doesn’t seem to understand the nature of the foreign threats.
 
For his part, McFaul is worried that, “If the war drags through the end of the year without major Ukrainian victories, the Biden administration will struggle to obtain congressional renewal for a new military and economic assistance package, especially as the presidential election heats up with at least one major candidate, Donald Trump, who is not a fan of aid to Ukraine.”
 
The claim that Trump “is not a fan of aid to Ukraine” is misleading. He was not a fan of foreign aid in general as long as the countries receiving it were not doing enough for themselves and for America. Hence, he recommended that NATO countries pay for more of their own defense, a very wise course that might have kept Moscow at bay, and develop their own energy resources.
 
More recently, at a rally in Texas, Trump declared, “China is threatening Taiwan, Iran is on the cusp of a nuclear bomb, Russia may take over Ukraine... Joe Biden’s weakness and incompetence is creating a very real risk of World War III.”
 
The terms “weakness” and “incompetence” are more accurate than Michael McFaul’s claim in Foreign Affairs that Biden has shown “remarkable leadership in galvanizing the world to assist Ukraine in 2022.” Biden’s too little and too late approach has brought us to this perilous point.
 
As we enter 2023, we have a war in Europe, the threat of war in Asia, and two recent terror attacks in Jerusalem involved the murder of Israeli civilians and 1 Ukrainian citizen.
 
Under these circumstances, surrender is not an option.
 
Understanding the Enemy
 
Our book, Red Jihad: Moscow’s Final Solution for America and Israel, examines the communist strategy that is being employed not only against the United States, Europe, and Asia, but Israel.  The key to understanding what has happened lies in the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a former Soviet KGB colonel and his regime is based on the remnants of the old Soviet Union, including its military and intelligence establishment.

In Ukraine, we see the brutality of the old Soviet military and KGB. There’s no excuse for buying the nonsense that Putin is somehow unlike his Soviet predecessors.

The reorganization of the old Soviet Union has indeed confused many in the West. My co-author J.R. Nyquist devotes his section of the book to the “collapse” of the Soviet Union and Russia’s geopolitical strategy to defeat and destroy the West.

Fortunately, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu understands the Soviet roots of international terrorism and the threat to Israel. He has spoken of the “poisonous tree” that has given rise to groups like Hamas. In fact, as Netanyahu knows and as our book demonstrates, modern-day Islamic terrorism grew out of the communist networks and Arab regimes that the Soviets sponsored. The roots of the “poisonous tree” can still be found in Moscow. In fact, many of the terror organizations active today can be directly traced to Moscow.

At the same time, the Iranian regime is sending warships to the Western Hemisphere, including Brazil, as well as drones to Russia for use against Ukraine.

Therefore, we can see that Ukraine’s defeat of Russia would deal a major blow to the Communist China-Russia-Iran alliance threatening the West.

But in order for this to happen, conservatives have to be united against our enemies -- all of them -- and make it clear to the world that people like Bannon, Tucker, and Charlie Kirk do not speak for the conservative movement.   

If Ukraine goes down, the conservative movement should not let itself be blamed for having greased the skids.
 
*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org 
 
 


Picture
1 Comment
Ben
2/11/2023 12:44:26 am

Well, regardless of what anyone thinks of Biden's policies to send military aid to the Ukrainians to oppose Russia's amateur hour invasion, at least we can say that he wasn't Putin's lap dog or choose to place his personal desires related to Putin and Russia above the security and global leadership legitimacy of the very nation he took an oath to protect and serve, the United States of America.

If he ever even had any to begin with, Trump lost any and all relevance or legitimacy for anything related to the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine, to include any opinions he offers on Joe Biden's leadership with the global response. Nevermind that the full Mueller Report explicitly states that it was very much not an exoneration of the Trump campaign's actions during his first Presidential campaign. Trump's bizarre deference to the authoritarian dictators from across the globe, but particularly of Vladimir Putin, showcased where his values and desires laid. In front of a massive crowd of red hat wearing disciples, rolling cameras, and essentially the entire world, Trump very clearly communicated to the Russian Federation, who we know now were conducting a massive social media disinformation campaign in favor of a Trump win, nothing short of marching orders for the Russian operatives to illegally break into Hillary Clinton's campaign systems to find, steal, and release what he characterized as "30,000 emails" he felt she was hiding. The fact that they don't exist didn't stop the Russians who hacked the DNC email server in the days that followed and released the Podesta Emails. Cause, and effect.

Of course who can forget all the high level foreign officials, members of the state run press, and known US-based Foriegn Intelligence Service (FIS) operatives from all the different nations around the world which Trump would play host to in the Oval Office, while keeping any domestic press members out? All those meetings where Trump was recorded bragging to these foreigners about firing any US Government officials who were asking too many questions about issues related to their nation's relationship with, well, Trump. Oh wait, that's right, he only did that with Russian officials, and Russian state run media, and Russian spies. It was that time that Trump disclosed top secret sources and methods to the Russians which prompted the CIA to immediately extract one of thier most valuable Russian assets who offered the highest level of access in the Kremlin at the time.

Of course we're all certain that Trump made sure that Putin knew who was boss, and make clear that any further incursions into Ukraine would not be tolerated during their 2 hour private meeting in Helsinki back in 2017. We could confirm this had Trump not made the highly irregular decision to take custody of all interpreter notes about the conversation, and demander the interpreter to never disclose any details of the conversation to anyone. We can't say for sure what was said, but as I said before, it must have been a very stern talking to by Trump to Putin, after all he had personally ordered the meddling during the election which Trump would go on to win.

Putin is a man who utilizes fear and violence as a means to an end, as we've all seen since his consolidation of power began. He rarely betrays his emotions in the moment, but on that day in Helsinki, he let slip a look that showed the world that Trump had really made clear that the US wouldn't tolerate any interference in our domestic affairs, any further military action against our NATO and nob-NATO European partners, and that the consequences of doing so would be swift and decisive. This expression on Putin's face was right around the time during the joint Trump/Putin press conference where Trump announced to the world that he was more convinced by the megalomaniac murderer standing to his left that the conclusions Trump's own Intelligence Community (IC), and that he didn't see a reason to do anything further about it.

Do you remember the strength Donald J. Trump always showed the Russians?? No, you don't because Trump was not interested in holding Putin accountable for the campaign that helped HIM get elected! He wasn't worried about the loss of access by our IC to the highest levels of one of our most aggressive adversaries, or the lives be put at risk by disclosing those sources and methods, he wasn't going to bother demanding that Putin put an end to the Russian cyber intrusions. He had personal and more importantly financial desires on his mind, and despite the oath he took to protect and serve the US Constitution, he chose, unsurprisingly, to pander to a murderous dictator who was orders of magnitude more intelligent and cunning than Trump could ever hope to be.

Had Putin invaded Ukraine with Trump in office, being strong and determined is exactly what Trump would have NOT been. He would have made excuses not to supply Ukraine with military aid. After all, Zelinsky didn't open that investiga

Reply



Leave a Reply.

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • Give
  • Contact
  • Archives