This is from Col Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief-of-staff to the Secretary of State, on Judge Napolitano’s show:
I’ve been told by fairly reliable sources that (Sec of State Anthony) Blinkin and (National Security Advisor Jake) Sullivan… Blinkin primarily but Sullivan too, have been sidetracked.
What’s happened is the Pentagon has taken over diplomacy as well as any action militarily speaking with regard to both theaters of war and so they’re now in charge.
I have to change my evaluation of (Defence Secretary Lloyd) Austin if that’s the case because it means he listened finally to the people in the bowels of the Pentagon who know the truth. He’s reacting to that.
He’s told the President that and to Biden’s credit even though he was furious he finally took that advice (not to allow Ukraine to fire long-range missiles into Russia or to back Israel against Hezbollah and/or Iran if Israel starts the war).
I’m generally not the type to root for a military takeover of deciding diplomatic and military matters. But the level of callow brinksmanship paired with epic cluelessness that has characterized Team Biden’s foreign policy has me greatly relieved by this Pentagon takeover (if true).
The best part was Bibi Netanyahoo being told that if he invades Lebanon he’s on his own.
The fact that UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer was publicly humiliated by Biden was just a sweetener on top.
KT Chong
There is nothing new there. I mostly agree with Col Lawrence Wilkerson (as well as Col. Douglas Macgregor, Larry Johnson, Ray McGovern, and Scott Ritter,) but they have been repeating the same points over and over again in their interviews. I have stopped following their interviews until I know they have some new materials.
Those people used to work in the military and CIA. They helped create the Deep State when they could have stopped it. Now they are complaining about what they created.
KT Chong
On the other hand, here are a treat and some new materials: a full hour of John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs on the same stage.
John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs @ All-In Summit 2024:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvFtyDy_Bt0
They discuss the Deep State, Russia, the Ukraine War, and disagree on China.
david lamy
Is changing the source for advise really a coup?
Having the State Department direct military affairs has not been a very savory development.
Nate Wilcox
KT: I too have been cutting back on my alt-media YouTubing for the same reason but, the bit about Ukraine being refused permission to fire even British missiles deep into Russia is new. The bit about the State Dept and Jake Sullivan being sidelined is also new.
David: I went with “coup” for the alliteration. What we’ve just seen is more of a follow up to a coup than a coup. They already forced Biden out of the campaign, this is just a mopping up operation.
Feral Finster
I will believe Col. Wilkerson when I see evidence of any of this.
We’ve been down such roads many times before. All have proven to be just more wishful thinking.
StewartM
I don’t know if this is a problem in the US State Department (surely it goes beyond just Blinken and Sullivan).
What has been lacking in US foreign policy for a long time is any connection between the political goals and actual military grasp. We use a fraction of troops that we used in occupation of Germany/Japan after WWII, and then we are like surprised that we really don’t control the place after years of occupation? This is the consequence of going away from a mass army (which uh, depends on participation and political support for causes widely backed by the public) to Cap Weinberger’s/Ronald Reagan’s ‘be-all-you-can-be’ small volunteer force stocked with expensive ‘shock and awe’ weapons but with insufficient guys carrying rifles around to control pretty much anywhere.
Conservatives wanted this military because they had convinced themselves that Vietnam was winnable only if those dirty stinking hippies back on college campuses hadn’t been burning their draft cards. Create one’s military from the nation’s poor that no one cares about, send them in with expensive gadgetry that ‘shocks and awes’ their Stone Age opponents, and presto! Wars for Exxon-Mobile and United Fruit in the Third World for the Greater Glory of Capitalism can continue with cheers to our brave boys (and girls!) in uniform (who we’ll quietly forget about if they come home maimed and looking forward to a lifetime of morphine addiction).
The problem of course, with the thinking above is even in Vietnam, there was a military problem unconnected to the student protests. Yes, we had a lot of troops (500,000 at most) and like in WWII, only a fraction of those are actually in combat roles, and they are stretched thin trying to defend/control a very LONG country. Ergo, this means that the NLF and NVA even if outnumbered in the aggregate could achieve local superiority at any given point they chose. Moreover, we saw this as a purely military problem, and forgot Clausewitz’s dictim that “War is politics by other means” and minimized the political solution(s).
I recall a South Vietnamese official being interviewed in Ken Burn’s “Vietnam” series saying that his practice was to find the NLF members in his district, and he would invite them over to TALK TO THEM, and to find out “why are you fighting?” He said that for the price of one US attack helicopter, “I could have fixed all their complaints” but of course that road was the road not taken. It was only 1964, but we had forgotten George Marshall and the Marshall Plan as a way of achieving peace and stability.
elkern
If true, this is Good News, if only because it implies that the NeoCons did not manage to gain control of the Defense Department (though they have apparently succeeded at State and Treasury).
It kinda makes sense. The Military is a very hierarchical bureaucracy, but one where almost all the important slots can only be filled by people who have worked their way up the pile. It was easier for the NeoCons to infiltrate State & Treasury, because Cheney & HRC were able to appoint more 2nd-layer managers who then (1) sidelined experienced personnel who [might have] opposed their Projects, (2) replaced them with loyal NeoCons, and (3) appointed 3rd-level managers to do the same.
OTOH, SecDef can’t just pin Stars on some geek parachuted in from a Think Tank. Yes, they can choose which Brass get more Brass, but *all* of the possible candidates for any Big Chair would have decades of experience in – and likely deep loyalty to – [their branch of] the US Armed Forces.
Of course, the Pentagon is infected by the MIC (essentially by bribing Brass with Purchasing power), but that merely reduces the effectiveness and increases the cost of the US Dept Defense. In a Real War, that would be a Bad Thing, but at least they seem to know that a Real War would be a Bad Thing in any case, where the NeoCons view US involvement in any war (especially in the Middle East) as a Good Thing.
KT Chong
US Naval Paper: US prepares “Distance Blockade” and Seizures of Chinese Ships to strangle Chinese economy and BRICS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHYSkm9Jl-g
Don’t take his words for it. He lists all his sources (and there lots of them) under the video.
The US Navy is NOT protecting the “freedom of navigation” around the world and benefiting China. If anything, the US Navy is beginning to act like state-sanctioned pirates and privateers of the 16th and 17th centuries. The US Navy is becoming a serious problem for China.
There was a question about if NATO should be abolished. I do not think it will be abolished. My intuition is that, over time, a new military alliance of the Global South will gradually arise in reaction to the US lawless behaviors of conducting coups and piracy to sabotage and undermine China, Russia, and BRICS. There is only one way to counter those lawless behaviors: military deterrence.
Which is why, it seems inevitable that the Global South will have to come together to form a military alliance to defend their economic interests and survive. If they do not, in time the US will crush them one by one to destroy China and BRICS. China has an old proverb: you can easily break a single piece of thin chopstick, but you can’t break a bundle of chopsticks together. If China does not take the lead to initiate such an military alliance to protect its survival, the US will also crush China in the end.
IMO, the military alliance will begin with a formal military pact between China and Russia, (which will send a shockwave to the US and EU.) Russia will also have a strong incentive to create a new Warsaw Pact. Afterward, many other BRICS and Global South nations (but not all of them) will want to join the new alliance to protect their own economic interests – and to protect their trade from America’s naval piracy and increasing lawlessness on the seas.
This new “Global South Alliance” or “Global South Initiate” will become an adversary vs. NATO, which will justify NATO’s continuous existence.
KT Chong
Another reason why China will want an alliance is because China does not want to bankrupt itself with military expenses. China does not want to shoulder the entire military expenses of countering the US + NATO, (which is increasingly pivoting to the east outside the Atlantic Ocean.) So China will want other countries to share and split the burden and cost of supporting a military alliance to counter the US + NATO all around the world.
China has tried to protect its own front and backyards, but the US is bringing the distant global fight to China. China will have to react and find some ways to counter… or be crushed and destroyed.
Jan Wiklund
K T Chong: Every top state official are constantly creating “the deep state” because this is a shorthand for the totality of state/government routines. It must be operable regardless of which persons that happen to sit at the levers for the moment, and operable fairly routine-bound at that.
Otherwise there would be even more chaos than there is.
Now, I readily admit that the chaos is big as it is. Dan Davies has a theory of why, see https://www.ft.com/content/0bb1b48f-b85a-4596-a0da-ac819bc69647. It’s simply a. because the combinations of routines tend to clusterfuck with time, and b. because those who have done the scouting for the consequences have been the neo-classic economists, the probably least able to scout of all.
Mark Level
I usually agree with Finster, but I’m going along with Wilkerson on this issue.
The larger issue is how, over time since the Bush 2 GWoT (Great War of Terror), the Pentagon/DoD & State Department switched roles.
Specifically, at one time the DoD pushed for war; the State Dept. by its charter was supposed to advocate for diplomacy & peace. However, by the time the hardcore NeoCons took over the Dem. party as well as the R’s, at the State Dept. there was no one there who advocated or practiced diplomacy, listening to other nations, & compromise– quite the reverse. The biggest drivers of this were Victoria Nuland (real name Nudleman), Jake Sullivan (he’s not at State now, but is in the coalition), Antony Blinken, and minor players like Samantha Power, head of US AID (many of whose officials have resigned, as the agency is NOT providing any “AID” to the Palestinians being mass-murdered since Oct. 8, 2023), the well named Ann Marie Slaughter, etc.
People like John Mearshimer & many others have pointed out that Blinken does not DO diplomacy, what he does is issue threats & orders. Thus he is respected by nobody (not even the Zionist state, though he serves it 110%) and has absolutely no influence with anybody except the weakest actors on whom his threats could legitimately be carried out. A few relevant examples of Biden administration “diplomatic” failures– 1. When states in Western Africa started to break away from & expel the US Empire, Nuland went there to threaten them. She was ignored, laughed at, & told to bugger off. 2. When Blinken went to Saudi Arabia, bin Salman made him wait for hours to meet, & Blinkered accomplished nothing. 3. When Janet Yellen was sent to China to demand they break up their alliance with Russia, so the US War over Taiwan, planned for in 2025 since at least 2018 (a statement by General Joseph Dunford that “China poses the greatest threat to our this nation by 2025”, Harper’s, Feb. 2018), Yellen was simply told to go away, as Blinken had been earlier.
Not just Mearshimer, but the Duran and many others have noted, conversely, that the Pentagon does not want WW III or a huge military failure, and now is the “brake” (to the extent it can be, my metaphor, not others’) on the NeoCons’ endless bloodlust and drive to start wars everywhere, the top 3 sites being obviously Ukraine-Russia, Israel (exterminate most Palestinians, deport the few survivors to Africa or somewhere unlivable) & China.
Defense (sic) Sec. Austen is stuck as the primary “adult in the room”, noting that the battle carriers in the Mediterranean were there too long, morale among troops in the dumpster, US cannot even defeat Ansar-al-Allah who has shut down shipping to Israel in the Southern Red Sea.
In closing, it’s interesting to note that most credible reports say it is Israel’s military leadership that is refusing Netanyahu’s demands (made so he stays in office & out of jail for corruption) for a wider war with Lebanon or even Iran, which it knows is unwinnable. The US case matches. The mass homicidal political leadership wants WW III ASAP. But the people who will have to fight it directly don’t think that is wise, or winnable. Can the political class, arrogant and out of touch with reality, ignite that war over objections by the military? Only time will tell.
I too never imagined, when younger & I watched Dr. Strangelove, that I would support a military “coup” over the civilian leadership. However, it has come to that, and shows that sometimes a seeming aberration in the usual script might be a positive thing.
https://johnhelmer.net/nudelmans-war-for-the-ukraine-clintons-war-for-the-presidency/
https://www.news18.com/world/saudi-crown-prince-mohammed-bin-salman-keeps-blinken-waiting-for-hours-before-meeting-him-8621027.html
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-houthis-have-defeated-the-us-navy/ar-AA1pldRJ
Feral Finster
1. Even if there is any truth to the rumors, which I continue to doubt (When was the last time that the military told State “no” on anything?), I wouldn’t call it a coup. I would think that it is the military’s job to tell the politicians what the military is and is not realistically capable of doing, lest the politicos mouths write checks that their asses cannot cash.
2. “I usually agree with Finster, but I’m going along with Wilkerson on this issue.”
Believe me, I’d love to be wrong.
Mark Level
A correction (or a few), & a reply to FF:
So the Harper’s issue that had the 2018 quote was Feb. 2019, not ’18.
Also, I should have noted what several people have documented. The Biden administration has (mostly) flatly refused to have ANY contact with Russia (& other “rival powers”) as if this makes them stronger. According to several sources, the last time Biden talked to Putin was right before the 2022 invasion. Putin told him the Ukrainian forces massed on the Donbass border was a red line (as was Ukraine joining NATO), Biden didn’t care, the SMO started shortly after. Biden recently made the absurd (& clearly false) statement that “I don’t think much about Vladimir Putin” when obviously ever since he took power after the US-run Symp Boris Yelstin was ousted, Biden has seethed with hatred for Russia and the desire to destroy it. And his admin bumbled into a losing war which has drained the US’s armaments (okay, a lot of what they gave the Ukros was garbage) & Treasury while losing a war.
Finster, I dunno if it’s better for Ukraine to collapse before the election (it quite possibly will, which might further cause the Dimmies to lose) or after. But I guess what most of us think doesn’t matter much, the Russians will wrap up the war as they see fit, and the US Empire will continue its rapid decline . . .
I heard Kim Iverson say recently that she despises both Trump & Harris, but wants to see the Dems lose more because they are so despicable. I think this is where I am also.
KT Chong
Kim Iversen is half-Vietnamese. My personal experiences with Vietnamese Americans: unlike other Asian Americans, they lean Republicans.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/05/25/asian-voters-in-the-u-s-tend-to-be-democratic-but-vietnamese-american-voters-are-an-exception/
Nowadays Iversen’s politics are very close to Jimmy Dore, who also absolutely positively despises Democrats and wants Trump to win.
Kim Iversen and Jimmy Dore started out as progressive left and Bernie supporters in 2016. However, both have become disillusioned and embittered with the Democrat Party. I think nowadays their politics can be described as being very close to “alt right”.
I actually agree with a lot of their views, but I can’t stand their conspiracies and nonsense on the COVID and vaccines.
Jimmy Dore’s right-shift is also a backlash to to the rise of gender politics and “wokeness”. In the respect, he is in the same camp as Bill Maher and Elon Musk, who have become anti-left due to the culture war issues, i.e., wokeness and gender issues.
Feral Finster
@Mark Level:
This assumes that Harris will lose (oddsmakers indicate otherwise) and that Russia has the stomach to actually finish Ukraine off (all indications point otherwise). This also assumes that the US Empire is anywhere near collapse (all indications point otherwise).
somecomputerguy
This may be the equivalent of the President potentially ordering the military to attack the moon.
U.S. military action has to be translatable to actual stuff; equipment, ammunition, people, and the means to move it. It may simply be that the capacity isn’t there, or can’t be had while maintaining current commitments.
I first read about defense production problems here. I have read elsewhere that there are only one or two plants making bullets in the U.S., and they are moving to a million-dollars-a-bullet defense contracting model, so as to maintain profits without wasting money on expanding facilities.
Lets remember Biden can fire people/and or they can be made to resign. Until Biden tries to fire them and fails, talk of a coup is premature. Carter fired the commander in South Korea for an ill-advised remark.
Wilkerson is telling a ‘war story’, and regardless of whether he himself believes it, there is a minimum 50% chance he is full of shit.
The phrasing of the Japanese P. M. anecdote makes him sound drunk.