Washington Plays Russian Roulette by Pepe Escobar for Asia Times. (Hat tip to Bill Harvey)
The great threat of nuclear war is not that some crazy Islamic terrorist will someday obtain a nuclear weapon. The threat is that decision-makers in Russia, the only nation with enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the United States, will think the USA is attacking or about to attack their nation, and their only choice is to retaliate or strike first.
I don’t think that the decision-makes in Washington, wicked and foolish as some of them seem to be, really plan to attack Russia. But they sure are doing things that give Russians reason to fear.
First, by expanding NATO to Russia’s borders. Second, by bringing an anti-missile defense system to Russia’s doorstep, which, if it worked (it probably won’t), would negate Russia’s ability to retaliate or defend itself. Third, by a reckless policy in Ukraine, which Pepe Escobar described pungently in this article.
During the Cold War with the Soviet Union, there were a number of times when American and Soviet defenders received false indications that their countries were under attack, and the decision-makers held back on retaliating. To count on this happening every time in the future is truly the same as playing Russian Roulette.
Dumbing It Away by “Spengler” for Asia Times.
The Chinese don’t believe in Heinlein’s Rule. They think U.S. government reduced the Middle East to chaos on purpose, in order to disrupt the world’s oil supply and strengthen the U.S. position as an energy producer. As evidence, they point out that the Islamic State (ISIS) is led by Sunni Arab officers armed and paid by General David Petreaus during the “surge” in 2007-2008.
David P. Goldman, writing as “Spengler,” would like to send the Chinese leaders copies of Why We Lost: a General’s Inside Account of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars by Daniel P. Bolger. General Bolger showed that U.S. policy was actually the result of a sincere effort to reach impossible goals by means of an unworkable strategy.
Malarkey on the Potomac by Andrew Bacevich for TomDispatch
Andrew Bacevich, a political scientist and retired military officer, said U.S. policy in the Middle East is based on five false assumptions: (1) U.S. forces in the Islamic world help stabilize the region and enhance U.S. power, (2) the Persian Gulf is vital to U.S. security, (3) Egypt and Saudia Arabia are valuable U.S. allies, (4) U.S. and Israel’s interests coincide and (5) terrorism is an existential threat. Bacevich explained clearly and briefly why none of these beliefs is true.