13 Comments
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

"Secrecy" is an interesting term to describe what they are doing here. I'd suggest obfuscation is a better one give that most of the mainstream reporting is likely due to authorized leaks, presumably of information that's considered classified, to shape a narrative.

Also this was amusing:

“The dynamics of an aerial engagement, I’d leave it up to the experts"

Presumably the Secretary of Defense, a retired United States Army four-star general who had to obtain special Congressional waiver for his nomination, is not considered an expert here.

Expand full comment
author

lol

Expand full comment

As you say, secrecy is a reflexive instinct in organizations like the security establishment. As with levee banks, it makes life easier most of the time, but rare and catastrophic failures outweigh this.

Expand full comment
author

Exactly

Expand full comment
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

The title of this article is such an understatement.

Expand full comment
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

Thank you for reporting on this.

Expand full comment
author

Glad you find it useful!

Expand full comment
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

It’s almost as if we were part of an experiment in just how far hubris can take people. I’m afraid we’re going to find out in a blazing flash of awareness.

Expand full comment
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

I doubt that Biden could clarify his policy which is even scarier. We cannot bungle our way into a war with Russia.

Expand full comment
Jun 2Liked by Ken Klippenstein

Hopefully they've been clearer with the message to Ukraine. They're on their last leg and don't stand a chance without full NATO support. Serious escalation would be one way to get that.

Expand full comment

Oh, puleeze! The US started a war that they expected would be easy to win. Net result after two years: US/UK/EU are shown to not have any clothes, the Ukies have proven themselves to be totally incompetent (they had from 2014 to 2022 to build up a strong defense (it was never explained why the Ukies needed to do that) and they completely and utterly failed), "The West's" wunder waffen have proven to not be so wunder (for a variety of reasons), Russian society has unified and Ukie society has fractured. The aggressors (the US and its vassals) are holdin' a losin' hand. You'd think they'd back off but you'd be wrong.

Russia is going to keep kicking Ukie ass until (a) the Ukies beg for peace and bring their master, the US, with them and/or (b) Russia fully takes control of the four oblasts that voted to join the RF and/or (c) they cut the Ukies off from the Black Sea by taking Odessa. NATO can't prevent any of those things from happening. I would think that it was way past time for the "Agonizing reappraisal" as they used to say in the wide world of sports. Apparently, I'd be wrong.

Expand full comment

my only correction is that the us didn't think the war would be easy to "win". their only goal, as evidenced by video-taped statements by lloyd himself, was the "wear down the russians". they wanted a war that nobody would win while their biggest military enemy wasted all their resources.

the flaw in the us assessment going into this war was an economical one. they greatly miscalculated the russians' ability to stand the economic pressure (achieved by shifting a great proportion of their economy to a war-time economy, trading with iran in gold, and being able to evade certain amount of sanctions due to china's strength/ability to make exceptions to the global economic order).

but otherwise, yes i agree with your assessment. its a truly sad situation for the people of ukraine bc there are two sides to this conflict and neither one cares about them.

Expand full comment

If strikes are conducted on targets in Russia, by definition, the USA becomes a belligerent in the war. The Biden Administration doesn’t have the authority to enter into any war without Congressional approval.

Expand full comment