As should be evident by now, Donald Trump is about 90% bombast and 10% substance when it comes to policy matters. But every now and then one of his word bombs finds its mark, as this one did when he dissed the presumptuous little pissant who shuttled-in from Kiev last week to embark upon still another American treasure hunt. Referring to Zelensky, the Donald averred,
“…(he’s) the greatest salesman in history. Every time he comes into the country, he walks away with 60 billion dollars.”
The Great Money Bubble...
Best Price: $2.14
Buy New $5.99
(as of 12:07 UTC - Details)
My god, times are indeed desperate when the once and former Peace Party of America is represented by the likes of Kamala “lethal force” Harris and Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, who saw fit to conduct a photo op ghoulishly signing artillery shells that are designed to blow to smithereens anyone in their glide path—man, woman, child or combatant. That is to say, we’ve reached the point, apparently, where the only hope to stop Washington’s vile War Machine is Donald J. Trump.
Still, we dare not be naive. Trump did not spend a lifetime delving deep into world history or thinking about how to promote a peaceful Taftian approach to an America First foreign policy in the world of 2024. The Donald’s sole preoccupation and expertise all along has been the promotion of The Donald.
Indeed, he actually had so little regard for the cause of world peace that he saw fit to populate his last administration with its sworn enemies—John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Mad Dog Mattis, Gina Haspel, Nikki Haley and Victoria Nuland, among a legion of other neocons and hawks. And when these warmongers brought him the transparently false flag “gas attack” on Douma in 2018 he didn’t hesitate to order “bombs away”.
Then again, what did the tiny god-forsaken hell-hole in Syria, with a GDP equal to 7.3 hours of annual US output and no blue water Navy or long range Air Force, have to do with the security of the US Homeland? Or with Making America Great Again?
Absolutely nothing, of course. The Douma bombing that Trump sanctioned was actually just another spasmodic strike of the War Machine attempting to enforce a US Imperium that is bankrupting America and making the world a far more dangerous place then it would otherwise be.
But this week’s contretemps at the Scranton munitions factory may be just what the doctor ordered to transform the Donald into the statesman who finally brought the Empire Home, and thereby at least slowed the nation’s headlong rush to fiscal Armageddon. That’s because for the Donald, policy positions are mainly a club to attack opponents and enemies.
So by coming to the ultra-swing state of Pennsylvania 40 days before what is likely to be the closest election in US history, Zelensky and his Deep State and military-industrial complex patrons have become the Donald’s mortal enemies. And about that we should know one thing by now without doubt.
To wit, the Donald is an angry, egomaniacal hot mess who gives the idea of holding a grudge a wholly new definition. So if elected, he will surely do all in his power to defenestrate Zelensky and cause the Deep State War Machine to suffer a humiliating defeat in Ukraine by flying to, say Budapest, and cutting a deal with Putin that does end the Ukraine proxy war very quickly indeed.
And he can do just that because the election interference of the once and current clown of Ukraine was so blatant that even the neocon hawks who dominate GOP national security policy on Capitol Hill have had their water shut-off by the revulsion of their own rank and file. For instance, Senator Ted Cruz, who ordinarily sports a very blackish plume of hawkish feathers, had this to say:
“Who the hell is Zelensky to be trying to interfere in our election? the arrogance of this guy,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Wednesday in his “Verdict” podcast. “And the guy, I’ve got to say, is an absolute moron for coming to the U.S. six weeks before the election and attacking Trump and Vance.
“This is just dumb on his part, because if Trump wins, he’s got a huge problem that just got bigger,” Cruz added.
The underlined phrase tells you all you need to know. The vast GOP majority is bolting from the authorized neocon position, leaving perhaps the likes of Lindsay Graham all by his lonesome out on the bleeding edge of the war paint parade.
Still, it just keeps getting better. The Dems have slid so far into the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) tank that they are positioning themselves as bellicose, latter day McCarthyites. Yet these kinds of attacks by their presidential candidate are only sure to fire-up the GOP’s partisan juices, meaning there will be precious little Republican resistance to the Donald’s likely Inauguration Day actions to end the proxy war on Russia.
Harris in her remarks took a veiled swipe at Trump and Vance, saying “some in my country” would “force Ukraine to give up large parts of its sovereign territory.”
“These proposals are the same of those of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” she said. “And let us be clear: They are not proposals for peace. Instead, they are proposals for surrender, which is dangerous and unacceptable.”
Puleeese. There is nothing very “sovereign” about a tyrannical administrative unit put together by Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev that had no prior organic national history of its own among the Russian, Polish, Lithuanian, Swedish, Austrian, Mongol and Turkish Empires that contested the Ukrainian steepes over the centuries before 1920. Nor would its partition today amount to anything remotely akin to “surrender”. In fact, quieting the guns, drones, tanks, artillery shells and warplanes along the line of contact in Ukraine would bring peace to the region, even as it spared what remains of the Ukrainian military age population and economic infrastructure from the senseless carnage now rampant all across the land.
Better still, the morning after the impending Trump-Putin territorial partition, which will likely carve away the Donbas and the Black Sea rim from a demilitarized, NATO-free rump of Ukraine, the dog that doesn’t bark will literally change the course of history. That is to say, the Baltics will not be invaded; Poland will not be occupied; the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin will not be entered by Russian troops; and the Benelux, France and England will slouch merrily onward toward socialist economic and moral decay without any assist from Vlad Putin, at all.
Stated differently, yet again no dominoes are destined to fall when the Washington War Party is forced once more to pack up the Empire and go home from the hideously misbegotten adventure in Ukraine. And by now it is deeply familiar with retreat, as in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and various lesser sites of previous imperial failure and humiliation.
Yet, hopefully, this time will be different. Perhaps this time a one-off defeat can be transformed into a history-making pivot away from Empire and the Warfare State to a renewal of America’s pre-1914 commitment to “no entangling alliances” and peaceful commerce with the rest of the world.
In that context, Donald Trump may become history’s paladin of salvation from the boot heels of the American Empire, but it will be up to the “Rescue the Republic” team led by Bobby Kennedy and Tulsi Gabbard to ensure that the entire hegemonic framework of national security policy which spawned this calamity will be discredited, repudiated and abandoned in favor of a non-interventionist foreign policy consistent with America’s Republican tradition and future economic health and survival.
Needless to say, the one and only place to start is by “starving the beast” on the Pentagon and Langley side of the Potomac. That is to say, only be exploring what it would take to cut the defense budget by 50% can the outlines of a 21st century Fortress America national security policy be appreciated.
Such a deep cut in the Pentagon’s current hideously bloated budget would still leave $450 billion per year to insure the security and liberty of the American homeland. Not only is that more than enough as we will amplify in Part 2, but the number itself has an uncanny level of historical verisimilitude.
As it happens, that was the level of the defense budget in today’s dollars of purchasing power when Bobby Kennedy’s uncle gave his powerful American University speech in June 1963. This soaring oration was delivered at the height of the cold war when the Soviet Union was still at the peak of its industrial and military vigor and just months after the Cuban Missile Crisis when the world had looked into the abyss of nuclear Armageddon.
Needless to say, the conventional politicians of the time were in a mode of full-throated anti-Soviet belligerence, yet JFK saw fit to make the greatest peace speech ever delivered by an American president. He well understood that at the then current level of defense spending, America had more than enough military capacity and deterrence power to discourage any would be aggressor, but that an adequate defense capability was but a pre-condition for the true security of a peaceful de-militarized world:
I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children–not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women–not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.
Since then there have been two huge changes in global geopolitics that have made the world far, far less threatening than the one JFK had faced months earlier during October 1962. To wit:
- The massively militarized, economically autarkic Soviet Empire has disappeared into the dustbin of history.
- The incipient militarized state in Red China under Mao failed five decades ago and was turned outward and transformed into a commercial export powerhouse by Deng Xiaoping after the early 1990s.
These epochal changes have profound significance for America’s homeland security. In the absence of a massively militarized autarkic state foe capable of global military power projection, the way is once again clear for a far more modest Fortress America national security posture.
To the point, today’s Russia is but a shadow of the Soviet Union with a GDP of just $2 trillion versus the $50 trillion of Europe and North America. And rather than absorbing upwards of one-third of GDP as in Soviet times, Russia’s paltry $60 billion defense budget prior to its special operation in Ukraine amounted to just 3.5% of GDP.
Even more importantly, Soviet Russia was a closed system with virtually no economic commerce with the world outside the communist bloc. Therefore it had nothing to loose economically in the event of an aggressive military assault on the west and the global conflagration which would have ensued.
To the contrary, China’s very economic modus operandi depends upon $3.5 trillion per year of exports to the outside world. The material prosperity in China that has given the ruling communist party an extended lease on life would collapse in a few months if Beijing even attempted a military assault on Western Europe or the United States. So PLA bombing of 4,000 Walmart stores in America will never happen. Nor will Chinese marines ever be landing on the California shores.
Accordingly, the United States today does not need a globalized, two-and-one-half war fighting capability that even JFK thought necessary in the early 1960s. Yet Washington continues to stand-up twice JFK’s military budget in real terms and maintain a global network of bases, power projection capabilities, alliances, commitments, interventions and occupations that were not even necessary in 1963.
As a practical matter, America’s ostensible “enemies” today have no offensive or invasionary capacity at all. Russia has only one aircraft carrier—a 1980s era vessel which has been in dry-dock for repairs since 2017 and is equipped with neither a phalanx of escort ships nor a suite of attack and fighter aircraft—and at the moment not even an active crew.
Likewise, China has just three aircraft carriers—two of which are refurbished rust buckets purchased from the remnants of the old Soviet Union, and which carriers do not even have modern catapults for launching their strike aircraft.
The Great Deformation:...
Best Price: $4.26
Buy New $8.99
(as of 05:50 UTC - Details)
Indeed, invasion of the American homeland would require a massive conventional armada of land, air and sea-based forces many, many times larger than the military behemoth that is now funded by Washington’s $900 billion defense budget. The logistical infrastructure that would be needed to control the vast Atlantic and Pacific Ocean moats surrounding North America and to sustain an invasion and occupation force of the US mainland is so mind-mindbogglingly vast as to be scarcely imaginable.
For want of doubt, the graphic below compares Washington’s 11 carrier battle groups, which cost about $25 billion each including their escort ships, suites of aircraft and electronic and missile capabilities, with those of the other major powers. Self-evidently, none of the non-NATO countries shown in the red area of the graphic—China, India, Japan, Russia or Thailand—will be steaming their tiny 3, 2 and 1 carrier battle groups toward the shores of either California or New New Jersey any time soon. An invasionary force that had any chance at all of surviving a US fortress defense of cruise missiles, drones, jet fighters, attack submarines and electronics warfare would need to be 100X larger.
Yet there is no GDP in the world—$2 trillion for Russia, $3.5 trillion for India or $18 trillion for China—that is even remotely close in size to the $50 to $100 trillion GDP that would be needed to support such an invasionary force without capsizing the home economy.
At the same time, the 11 US carrier battle groups, which will cost upwards of $1.2 trillion over the next decade, would have no role in a continental Fortress America defense at all. They would be sitting ducks in the blue waters, and far less effective than aircraft and missile defenses based in the North American interior.
In short, these massively expensive forces have no purpose other than global power projection and the conduct of wars of invasion and occupation abroad. That is, they are white elephant military accoutrements of a day gone by, not even remotely relevant to a proper Fortress America defense in 2024.
In today’s world, in fact, the only theoretical military threat to America’s homeland security is the possibility of nuclear blackmail. That is to say, a First Strike capacity so overwhelming, lethal and effective that an enemy could simply call out checkmate and demand Washington’s surrender.
But as we will show in Part 2, an absolutely invulnerable triad (air, sea and land-based) nuclear deterrent can be funded for just $75 billion per year, or barely 6% of the current national defense budget. Much of the rest has nothing to do with securing the American Homeland behind the great Atlantic and Pacific Ocean moats from conventional attack and, in fact, is useful mainly for power projection abroad and operating the now obsolete global network of cold war alliances and bases stretching across the globe.
Reprinted with permission from David Stockman’s Contra Corner.
