ON MONDAY MORNING, 30 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus sent a letter to the White House that attempted to gingerly open a conversation about a potential diplomatic end to Russia’s war on Ukraine. The door was slammed shut by the evening, met with enough fury to elicit a “clarification” in the form of a statement from caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal.
House Progressives Swiftly Walk Back Letter Asking Biden to Pursue Russia Diplomacy
They need to grow a backbone!
In a letter to the president, the lawmakers call for the US to push for a diplomatic settlement to the war in Ukraine
Thirty Progressive House Democrats Urge Biden to Negotiate With Russia
Nuclear War Political Science and Berkeley Springs
No member of the Democratic Party in Congress would ever challenge the military industrial complex the way [Clare] Daly does.
Not one – not Bernie Sanders, not Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, not Rashida Tlaib. Not one voted against the tens of billions of dollars in arms we are sending to fuel the war in Ukraine. Not one.
As Henry Kissinger wrote in 2014, “The demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.”
Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 Over Ukraine?
Now is the time for Biden to clarify U.S. nuclear doctrine. But he remains silent.
by Scott Ritter
On Monday, Oct. 17, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization kicked off Operation STEADFAST NOON, its annual exercise of its ability to wage nuclear conflict. Given that NATO’s nuclear umbrella extends exclusively over Europe, the indisputable fact is that STEADFAST NOON is nothing more than NATO training to wage nuclear war against Russia.
Nuclear High Noon in Europe
Related:
Video via Judge Napolitano
How JFK Sacrificed Adlai Stevenson and the Lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis
In those interim years, the fictional story of how the missile crisis was resolved became foreign-policy folklore. None of the early memoirs by top Kennedy aides, such as Schlesinger and Sorensen, contained the real history. These incomplete accounts became the basis of the foreign-policy models and paradigms in political scientist Graham Allison’s highly influential book, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. A full generation of scholars, analysts, foreign-policy makers, and even presidents learned the wrong lessons from the most significant superpower conflict in modern history.
Sixty years later, however, the Biden administration at least has a more complete record of history to draw on as U.S. policymakers and the world confront another time of crisis in the nuclear age. How applicable the lessons of the missile crisis will prove to be in preventing an escalation of the Russia-Ukraine war remains unknown. But the mantra of reason that Stevenson shared with Kennedy in October 1962 seems more relevant than ever: “Blackmail and intimidation never, negotiation and sanity always.”
Related:
The Cuban Missile Crisis @ 60 How John F. Kennedy Sacrificed His Most Consequential Crisis Advisor
US officials have ruled out pushing Ukraine to negotiate with Russia even though they don’t think either side can win the war “outright,” The Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
US Officials Have Ruled Out Pushing Ukraine to Negotiate With Russia
US officials gave Ukraine public green light to bomb Kerch bridge
Completely excluded from any account in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal was the fact that senior US officials not only publicly authorized, but a former US official publicly encouraged, the attack to take place.
“Bomb Russia’s bridge to Crimea, Ukraine urged,” read the headline in the Times of London on July 7, reporting the statements of US General Philip Breedlove, NATO’s former Supreme Allied Commander Europe.
…
The next day, July 8, clearly referencing Breedlove’s comments, a reporter identified only as “Howard” asked at a Pentagon background briefing, “can you talk about any preclusions? Would the — would the Kerch Bridge be not precluded as a potential target?”*
The defense official replied, “As I said, there aren’t any preclusions that I’m aware of about the Ukrainians fighting on their sovereign territory against Russia.”
Related:
* [07-08-2022] U.S. Says Russia’s Prized Kerch Bridge Is A Fair Target For Ukrainian Forces
At a press briefing held this morning, The War Zone asked a senior U.S. official whether or not there were any preclusions about the use of High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS, in Ukraine against certain targets. Speaking to reporters on the condition of anonymity, the official responded by saying that they couldn’t reveal any further information about specific targets, but that “Russian forces’ capabilities and logistics nodes within Ukraine are absolutely fantastic” targets. The War Zone followed up, asking if there were any hesitations about using the HIMARs against the Kerch Bridge. The official responded as follows.
“As I said, there aren’t any preclusions that I’m aware of on Ukrainians fighting on their sovereign territory against Russia.”
The Biden administration and the media present Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons in response to military setbacks as an unprecedented break with long-established and hitherto unquestioned rules of international statecraft. This narrative is a lie.
A history of US threats to use nuclear weapons
By Natylie Baldwin
I first came across Benjamin Abelow’s analysis of the Ukraine war as a lengthy article published on Medium in May. I found the depth and thoroughness of his article impressive and complimented him on it. When he told me that he’d expanded it into a short book, I was intrigued and offered to review it. I was not disappointed.
Review of Benjamin Abelow’s “How the West Brought War to Ukraine”
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.