NATO risks World War III in Ukraine — while lining the defense industry's pockets
北约冒着在乌克兰爆发第三次世界大战的风险——同时又为国防工业提供了丰厚的收入
"乌克兰完了" 美国陆军上校揭露美国对俄战争失败的真相
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj7qBp3TR8s&ab_channel=
2024年5月12日
丹尼尔·戴维斯上校再次加入节目，报道乌克兰战场的最新情况。 美国政府刚刚向乌克兰追加了 610 亿美元，但其中大部分资金将留在美国。 我们讨论为什么这场战争失败了，俄罗斯在人员和弹药方面都拥有最大的优势，最后我们反驳了普京想要入侵和攻击西欧的理论。
美国正在投资乌克兰的失败
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4649865-america-is-investing-in-ukrainian-failure/?
作者：丹尼尔·戴维斯 Daniel L. Davis 中校 - 05/08/24
2023 年 4 月 13 日星期四，155 毫米 M795 炮弹在宾夕法尼亚州斯克兰顿的斯克兰顿陆军弹药厂的制造过程中储存。（美联社照片/Matt Rourke）
拜登总统上个月末大张旗鼓地签署了 950 亿美元的对外援助计划，声称这“将使美国变得更安全”。 这将使世界变得更加安全。” 尽管许多乌克兰支持者庆祝该法案的通过，但仔细审视相关事实应该会缓和一些兴奋情绪。 虽然这笔现金可能使乌克兰武装部队（UAF）能够继续战斗，但不太可能改变最终结果。
从数字来看，乌克兰永远不可能赢得战争并夺回所有失去的领土。 如果基辅不迅速寻求以最佳条件进行谈判解决，乌克兰最终可能会遭受彻底失败。
如果你认为，在我们在阿富汗经历了整整两个十年的可怕战略灾难之后，我们不会急于重复我们的缺陷，这是情有可原的。 但你就错了。 正如一位同事最近对我打趣的那样，美国的外交政策似乎陷入了“双倍下注”模式，即我们不承认错误，然后纠正它们，而是简单地忽略错误，并加倍下注导致失败的相同政策要素。 第一名。
这种不健康的倾向在乌克兰得到了充分体现。 现实情况是，美国本可以通过冷静和成熟的外交手段避免这场战争。 尽管欧洲各国首都和乌克兰领导人拥有代理权并且并非没有罪责，但华盛顿毫无疑问在与俄罗斯和乌克兰有关的战争与和平问题上发挥着主导作用。
我们本可以坚持要求乌克兰和欧洲尽一切努力执行明斯克协议的条款。 尽管俄罗斯确实在履行其义务方面拖拖拉拉，但正如德国前总理安格拉·默克尔所承认的那样，西方显然从未打算让乌克兰遵守这些条款，而只是利用该协议作为基辅建立和训练其军事力量的掩护 。
我们本可以在 2021 年 12 月与基辅和莫斯科合作，找到足够的共同点，达成协议，防止俄罗斯入侵并保持对话。 弗拉基米尔·普京的开放要求显然超出了西方任何人所能接受的范围，但这就是任何谈判的目的：双方从自己的最佳立场开始，然后通过谈判达成双方都能接受的妥协。 普京的提议甚至没有被接受。
俄罗斯常说的不可谈判的议题是乌克兰加入北约，这将使军事联盟来到莫斯科的家门口。 普京公开提出谈判一个月后，北约秘书长延斯·斯托尔滕贝格明确予以否认，他表示北约坚持 2008 年承认乌克兰的声明，并表示他将继续“帮助乌克兰加入北约”。
战争刚开始六周，土耳其主持了乌克兰和俄罗斯之间的会谈，也有可能通过谈判达成解决方案。 在那次会议之前，弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基公开表示，他将考虑满足普京的主要要求：中立。 3 月 29 日，双方似乎即将达成协议以结束战争。 但由于仍不明朗的原因，泽伦斯基几天后急剧改变方针，这笔交易宣告失败。 2022 年 10 月，泽伦斯基签署了一项法案，只要普京继续担任总统，就禁止与俄罗斯进行谈判。 从那以后就没有进行过任何认真的讨论。
许多乌克兰支持者声称，美国新的援助计划将在一定程度上缓解严重的弹药短缺问题，但对于现金和弹药的注入将如何扭转俄罗斯在战场上的巨大优势却保持沉默。 为了让乌克兰有机会取得军事胜利（定义为将俄罗斯赶出被占领土，回到 1991 年甚至 2022 年的边界），支持者必须切实表明这种援助将如何扭转普京在空中力量、防空方面的优势 、火炮弹药生产、导弹、无人机、电子战、军事工业能力，尤其是人力。
但没有人能绘制出这样一张图
反之，因为美国和我们的盟友都不愿意放弃自己的大部分国防库存和资金来提供足够的资金来扭转这种不平衡，而且需要很多年的时间才能尝试增加所需的装备数量 扩大产能。
毫无疑问，泽连斯基很快就会要求美国提供更多资金，因为目前的一揽子计划可能会让他们度过今年的难关，但不会再多了。 这不是乌克兰应该指望的。 华盛顿经过长达六个月的政治角力才最终达成这项协议。 目前还不清楚是否还会有一项融资法案，更不用说未来几年持续的现金注入了。
我们应该做的是告诉泽连斯基和北约盟友真相：我们不会继续支持一项无法成功的政策。 如果我们明智且真正重视乌克兰人的生命，我们就应该提供足够的武器和弹药，以坚守阵地——只要基辅积极公开地寻求与莫斯科通过谈判达成解决方案。 重点应该是认清现实，停止杀戮、对乌克兰城市的破坏和更多领土的丧失，并为幸存者提供一个合法的未来机会。
如果西方和基辅继续忽视现实，并坚持相信只要有足够的时间和金钱，他们就能赢得战争，那么乌克兰最终被提出投降条件的可能性就会上升到危险的高度。
丹尼尔·L·戴维斯中校是 Defense Priorities 的高级研究员和军事专家，也是 YouTube 上“丹尼尔·戴维斯深度剖析”节目的主持人。 通过@DanielLDavis1 关注他
北约冒着在乌克兰爆发第三次世界大战的风险——同时又为国防工业提供了丰厚的收入
作者：Douglas MacKinnon，意见贡献者 - 05/11/24
2024年5月9日，俄罗斯军人参加在莫斯科红场举行的胜利日阅兵式。俄罗斯庆祝二战战胜纳粹德国79周年。首先，真正令人震惊的消息似乎无人关心：乌克兰战争日益接近引发核打击。
本周早些时候，独立总统候选人小罗伯特·肯尼迪再次对这场即将发生的灾难发出警告，他发帖称：“乌克兰局势正处于灾难性升级的边缘。 华盛顿的军事帝国主义者和他们在欧洲的走狗知道他们正在招致的危险吗？ 他们执行外交政策就好像这是一场‘吃鸡’游戏。”
肯尼迪是噩梦般的正确。 这是我在本网站上多次强调过的一点。 无论是拜登政府、英国、法国还是其他国家的行动，西方一些人似乎有意让弗拉基米尔·普京和俄罗斯人做出难以想象的事情。 为什么？
撇开“我们必须团结一致反对普京”、“我们必须拯救乌克兰人民”或“我们必须保护北约”等不断变化的论点不谈，这里还有其他力量在起作用。 其中第一个：金钱。
在我们到达那里之前，对于那些试图“拯救乌克兰人民和基础设施”的人，我真的很遗憾地告诉你，你们失败了。 虽然大多数媒体似乎不愿报道该国的某些事实，但事实确实如此：数十万男人、女人和儿童被杀或受伤； 该国的大部分基础设施已化为瓦砾； 超过 600 万乌克兰人逃离了自己的国家。 那些鼓励乌克兰在距离战场数千英里的舒适和安全的办公室里战斗到最后一个公民的人需要拿出更有说服力的理由。
现在，回到钱。 4 月底，拜登总统签署了另一项针对乌克兰、以色列和台湾的援助计划，金额高达 950 亿美元。 但是，正如他们在深夜广告中常说的那样，“等等，还有更多。” 正如上个月报道的那样：“乌克兰和美国正在制定长期安全协议。”
“长期”到底有多长？ 根据风险投资家兼播客主持人 David Sacks 以及其他人的说法，“长期”大约相当于 10 年，成本超过 1 万亿美元。
显然，对于我国和欧洲的许多国防承包商来说，乌克兰已经成为不断赠送的礼物。 但是，源源不断的纳税人资金何时开始变得类似于“欺诈、浪费和滥用”呢？ 现在有些人肯定会这么说，因为数亿美元已经消失在乌克兰的各个老鼠洞里，而没有任何责任。
接下来，涌入乌克兰的数十亿援助何时开始类似于世界上最大的庞氏骗局？ 这种古老骗局的一个定义是一种欺诈形式，用较新投资者的资金向较早投资者支付利润。 除本例外，“较早”和“较近”的投资者并非出于自愿
。 他们的各国政府正在为他们做出决定，因为他们将辛苦赚来的钱转交给乌克兰，或者很可能转交给犯罪企业。
这种情况下的欺诈听起来很像这样：“我们现在必须通过提供数千亿美国纳税人的资金来支持乌克兰，这样我们以后就不必派遣美军了。” 哎呀，到底谁会命令这些军队去乌克兰作战呢？
回到肯尼迪的警告，我们现在似乎——在没有任何人征求我们批准的情况下——就乌克兰问题与普京和俄罗斯进行了一场核“鸡”游戏。 至少是疯狂的傲慢。
正如 RFK Jr. 所言：“英国外交大臣戴维·卡梅伦最近表示，乌克兰有权使用英国武器打击俄罗斯。 作为回报，莫斯科警告英国大使，这将引发俄罗斯对伦敦的报复。” 《纽约时报》上周报道称，美国秘密向乌克兰运送了可以深入俄罗斯领土的 ATACM 导弹； 俄罗斯宣布使用战术核武器进行演习并非巧合。
这些是否会让你的血液变冷？ 它应该。
过去两年与我交谈过的专家中，没有一个人相信乌克兰能够赢得这场战争。 揭发庞氏骗局、结束核“鸡”游戏并通过谈判解决问题的时候早已过去。
到了某个时候，普京肯定会厌倦这个游戏，直接开车撞上迎面而来的车辆。 那么这次爆炸的实际后果会是什么？
道格拉斯·麦金农 (Douglas MacKinnon) 是一名政治和传播顾问，也是罗纳德·里根 (Ronald Reagan) 和乔治·H·W·布什 (George H.W. Bush) 总统的白宫撰稿人。 布什，并在布什政府最后三年担任五角大楼政策和通讯特别助理。
"Ukraine is Finished" US Army Colonel Reveals TRUTH About America's Failed War Against Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj7qBp3TR8s&ab_channel=
2024年5月12日
Colonel Daniel Davis joins the show again to report the latest from the battlefield of Ukraine. The US Government just sent an additional $61 Billion dollars to Ukraine, however the majority of that money will stay in the US. We discuss why this war is failing, the supreme advantage Russia has with both men and ammo, and finally we disprove the theory that Putin wants to invade and attack Western Europe.
America is investing in Ukrainian failure
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4649865-america-is-investing-in-ukrainian-failure/?
by Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, opinion contributor - 05/08/24
155 mm M795 artillery projectiles are stored during manufacturing process at the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant in Scranton, Pa., Thursday, April 13, 2023. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)
To great fanfare, President Biden signed the $95 billion foreign aid package late last month claiming it was “going to make America safer. It’s going to make the world safer.” While many Ukraine supporters have celebrated the bill’s passage, a closer examination of relevant facts should temper any excitement; while this cash may enable the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) to continue fighting, it isn’t likely to change the ultimate outcome.
By the numbers, Ukraine will never win the war and retake all its lost territory. If Kyiv doesn’t quickly seek a negotiated settlement on the best terms available, Ukraine may ultimately suffer an outright defeat.
You would be forgiven for thinking that after the horrendous strategic disaster that was our two-full-decades-in-the-making defeat in Afghanistan, we wouldn’t be in a rush to repeat our flaws. But you would be mistaken. As a colleague recently quipped to me, American foreign policy seems stuck in the “double down” mode, whereby instead of acknowledging errors — and then correcting them — we simply ignore the mistakes and double down on the same policy elements that led to failure in the first place.That unhealthy penchant is on full display in Ukraine. The reality is that this war could have been averted with sober and mature diplomacy by the United States. Though European capitals and Ukrainian leaders have agency and are not free from guilt, Washington unquestionably drives the train on matters related to war and peace vis-à-vis Russia and Ukraine.
We could have insisted that Ukraine and Europe did whatever it took to implement the terms of the Minsk Agreements. While Russia certainly dragged its heels on implementing its obligations, the West, as admitted by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, apparently never intended for Ukraine to abide by the terms, only using the agreement as cover for Kyiv to build up and train its military forces.
We could have worked with both Kyiv and Moscow in December 2021 to find enough common ground to come to an agreement to prevent a Russian invasion and keep dialogue alive. Vladimir Putin’s opening demands were clearly beyond what anyone in the West would have accepted, but that’s what any negotiations are about: each side starting with its optimal position and then negotiating down to a mutually acceptable compromise. Putin’s offer wasn’t even entertained.
Russia’s oft-stated non-negotiable was Ukraine joining NATO, which would bring the military alliance to Moscow’s doorstep. One month after Putin’s public offer of negotiations, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg delivered a clear repudiation when he said the alliance stands by its 2008 declaration to admit Ukraine, and that he would continue to “help Ukraine to move towards a NATO membership.”
A negotiated settlement was also possible barely six weeks into the war when Turkey hosted talks between Ukraine and Russia. Heading into that meeting, Volodymyr Zelensky stated publicly he would consider meeting Putin’s main requirement: neutrality. On March 29, it appeared both sides were near a deal to end the war. But for reasons that remain murky, Zelensky sharply reversed course days later and the deal died. In October 2022, Zelensky signed a bill prohibiting negotiations with Russia so long as Putin remains president. There haven’t been any serious discussions since.
Many Ukraine supporters claim that the new U.S. aid package will provide some relief from severe ammunition shortages, but remain deathly silent on how this infusion of cash and ammunition will reverse the huge advantages Russia has on the battlefield. For Ukraine to even have a shot at military victory (defined as driving Russia out of occupied territory back to the 1991 — or even 2022 — borders), advocates must show, tangibly, how this aid will reverse Putin’s advantages in air power, air defense, artillery ammunition production, missiles, drones, electronic warfare, military industrial capacity and, above all, manpower.But no one can chart such a course, because neither the United States nor our allies are willing to part with major portions of their own national defense stocks and funds to provide enough to reverse the imbalance, and it will take too many years to try and grow the required volume of kit by expanding capacity.
Zelensky will no doubt soon ask for more U.S. funding, as this current package might get them through this year, but no more. That’s not something Ukraine should count on. It took six long months of political wrangling in Washington to get this deal out the door; it is unclear there will even be one more funding bill, much less sustained cash infusions for years into the future.
What we should do is tell Zelensky and NATO allies the truth: we’re not going to keep backing a policy that can’t succeed. If we are wise and truly value the lives of Ukrainians, we should offer to supply enough weapons and ammo to try to hold the line — as long as Kyiv actively and publicly seeks a negotiated settlement with Moscow. The point should be to recognize reality, stop the killing, the destruction of Ukrainian cities, and the loss of more territory, and give the survivors a legitimate chance at a future.If the West and Kyiv continue to ignore reality and cling to the fiction that with enough time and money they can win the war, the chances rise to dangerous highs that Ukraine will eventually be presented with terms of surrender.
Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow and military expert at Defense Priorities and the host of the “Daniel Davis Deep Dive” show on YouTube. Follow him at @DanielLDavis1
NATO risks World War III in Ukraine — while lining the defense industry's pockets
by Douglas MacKinnon, opinion contributor - 05/11/24
Russian servicemen attend the Victory Day military parade on Red Square in Moscow on May 9, 2024. Russia celebrates the 79th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in World War II.
First, the truly alarming news next to no one seems to care about: Day by day, the war in Ukraine is tipping ever closer to triggering a nuclear strike.
Earlier this week, independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. once again waved the warning flag on this pending cataclysm, posting: “The situation in Ukraine is on the brink of calamitous escalation. Do the military imperialists in Washington and their lackeys in Europe have any idea the danger they are courting? They are conducting foreign policy as if it were a game of ‘chicken.’”
Kennedy is nightmarishly correct. It is a point I have stressed several times on this site. Be it the actions of the Biden administration, the United Kingdom, France or others, some in the West seem intent in daring Vladimir Putin and the Russians to do the unthinkable. Why?Leaving aside the ever-malleable arguments that: “We have to stand as one against Putin,” “We have to save the people of Ukraine” or “We have to protect NATO,” there are also other forces at work here. First among them: money.
Before we get there, for those trying to “save the people and infrastructure of Ukraine,” I am truly sad to report that you have failed. While most in the media seem averse to reporting certain facts in the country, this much is true: Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children have been killed or wounded; much of the infrastructure of the country has been reduced to rubble; and over 6 million Ukrainians have fled their nation. Those encouraging Ukraine to fight to its last citizen from the comfort and safety of their offices thousands of miles from the battlefield need to come up with a more convincing rationale.
Now, back to the money. Toward the end of April, President Biden signed yet another aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, this one to the tune of $95 billion. But, as they used to say in the late-night commercials, “Wait, there’s more.” As reported last month: “Ukraine and US working on long-term security agreement.”
How long is “long term”? According to venture capitalist and podcast host David Sacks — as well as others — “long term” would equal approximately 10 years and cost upwards of $1 trillion.
Clearly, for a number of defense contractors in our nation and in Europe, Ukraine has become the gift that keeps on giving. But when does a never-ending supply of taxpayer money begin to resemble “fraud, waste and abuse”? Some would certainly say now, as hundreds of millions of dollars have already disappeared down various rat holes in Ukraine with no accountability.
Next, at what point do the billions and billions of aid pouring into Ukraine begin to resemble the world’s largest Ponzi scheme? One definition of that age-old scam is a form of fraud that pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors. Except in this case, the “earlier” and “more recent” investors are not doing so of their own volition. Their various governments are deciding for them, as they take their hard-earned money and turn it over by the billions to Ukraine or, quite possibly, criminal enterprises.The grift in this case can sound very much like this: “We have to prop up Ukraine now by sending hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars, so we won’t have to send in U.S. troops later.” Gee, and just who would be ordering those troops into combat in Ukraine?
Going back to Kennedy’s warning, we now seem to be — without anyone asking for our approval — engaging in a game of nuclear “chicken” with Putin and Russia over Ukraine. Insane hubris at the least.
As RFK Jr. posted: “British Foreign Secretary David Cameron recently stated that Ukraine has the right to use British weapons to strike Russia. In return, Moscow warned the British ambassador that that would provoke Russian retaliation against London.” The New York Times reported last week that the U.S. secretly shipped ATACM missiles to Ukraine that can strike deep into Russian territory; not by coincidence, Russia announced training maneuvers using tactical nuclear weapons.Does any of that make your blood run cold? It should.
None of the experts I have spoken with over the course of the last two years believe Ukraine can win this war. It’s long past the time to blow the whistle on the Ponzi scheme, end the game of nuclear “chicken” and enter into a negotiated settlement.
At some point, Putin is sure to tire of the game and drive straight into the oncoming vehicle. What then will be the literal fallout from that explosion?Douglas MacKinnon, a political and communications consultant, was a writer in the White House for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and former special assistant for policy and communications at the Pentagon during the last three years of the Bush administration.
