The demands on an overstretched U.S. military are growing.
We sent an expeditionary force to Poland that that can face the Russian Army (good move). Then, we sent a carrier and troops close to Israel (was it necessary or political?). Then we sent a task force to the Red Sea (enough to mostly guard the straits, but not enough to eliminate the problem). Many of the ships at sea are overdue for overhaul and crews have been extended several times.
What do we have in reserve for the next crisis?
The American left has been so preoccupied with Trump that they gave Biden et al (yes, this comment is aimed at people like Claire Berlinski) a free hand to screw up American foreign policy.
Exhibit A is the completely free hand the WH was given to tilt towards Iran (including giving billions of dollars). Why? What is the expected outcome?
But it wasn't just Iran. The Biden administration organized one of the most feckless withdrawals ever when they left Afghanistan (the withdrawal was necessary, but so was some competence in managing the withdrawal).
Every American ally is watching the Ukraine (yes, the Republicans are complicit in this fiasco) and drawing the wrong (for us) conclusions.
Asia is watching the Philippine outpost on Second Thomas Shoal as the Chinese blockade the Philippine troops stationed there. The Biden administration talks supportive, but no action has been forthcoming. The Philippines has to be close to reaching an accommodation with the Chinese.
Meanwhile, Taiwan is digesting the implications of all this.
On the domestic front, circa 8 million illegals have entered during Biden's administration - the implications are not clear, except that everyone recognizes that the rule of law is not being enforced and the U.S. population is severely divided.
Last year (10/31/23), our deficit reached $2 trillion. For a peacetime economy that the Biden administration claims is doing very well.
To paraphrase Hemingway:
"How Did You Go become a second rate power?"
"Two Ways. Gradually and Then Suddenly."
We appear to be near the end of "gradually" phase.
Consider the implications according to the Thucydides Trap.
Regarding your first comment on US being overstretched. Exactly the issue.
There does not need to be carrier groups in the Mediterranean "deterring" Hezbollah. Hezbollah in Lebanon, like Hamas in Gaza is Israel's problem - and Israel can take care of them (assuming US political support and US willing and able to re-arm). But Iran, the Houthis and other Shiite militias are the free worlds - and hence the US's problem, too. It is in the Red Sea, Gulf of Arabia, Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean that needs US firepower. The goal is deterring China - and that can only be done by regime change in Iran.
I’ve written the same thing on The Neoliberal Standard. We need a massive show of force in “Cold War II” with China to use Niall Ferguson’s phrase to restore deterrence and gain the upper hand. Cracking down on Iran and bombing the nuclear program to smithereens is the perfect opportunity. And it would be sure to deter Xi in the South Pacific. To realize how necessary this is, one only has to consider the implications for world order if, after years of saying we wouldn’t let Iran build nukes, we stood by while Iran built nukes. You can bet your last dollar that Iran will use the capability to invade Saudi Arabia and menace Israel and the Arab world conventionally, using nukes as blackmail exactly like Putin in Europe. But however to bomb Iran and destroy Iran’s militias would be an amazing show of our commitment to our allies and prove to the international order that we care enough about it to prevent nuclear proliferation and contain our enemies. And because we’ll do this, we’ll protect NATO from Russia and the Pacific from China. Like you said, Iran enables Russia and China and North Korea like no other state, but it is the weakest link. The pressure is on for America and Israel being the bigger dogs, to defeat Iran for the sake of everything else.
What do you think of the idea that the carrier groups in the Mediterranean were put there as much to deter Hezbollah as deter Israel from going after Hezbollah, because Iran and its proxies and Israel are strategically equivalent to Biden in his desperation to avoid a “wider regional war?”
I think that is a strong possibility and have written about that. While Biden himself is an old-style Democrat and not anti-Israel per se, it seems that the rest of his administration are Obama Dems who are a bit less friendly to Israel.
I actually disagree with most of the things said here but I agree with this that the carrier groups are in fact to deter Israel not support it. Where I disagree with what is being said here is I think the get tough on Iran boat sailed away all the way back during the 2008 Presidential Election when Obama essentially won on a go soft on Iran platform. Not only that but as is very well known none other than George W Bush himself in the final months essentially started supporting Obama behind the scenes while letting John McCain twist in the wind just like Liz Cheney is now supporting Biden.
Where I challenge people like Jay and Claire is to come up with a domestic political framework that challenges the events that caused George W Bushism to decline as a political ideology in the late 2000s(to the point that George W Bush no longer even believed in it). One theory of mine is actually George W Bush in the end was always the quasi isolationist he originally campaigned as in the late 1990s and thus when Obama offered to support his economic policies in his final year in office it was an easy decision for Bush and his closest supporters like Hank Paulson to throw there support to Obama.
We've discussed this before... are we talking an intelligence-gathering deterrent? Because even if the Stern Gang magically shows up and starts lining Palestinians up against the wall, I don't see the US dropping ordinances on Israelis.
Deterrent meaning the US says - if you go against us, it means you don't trust us. An excuse to, as they used to say, "re-assess our relationship" with you
- not including the PA in a future Gaza government
- not stopping in Gaza when the US says to stop
- not agreeing to a Palestinian state on the West Bank
- sending ground troops into Lebanon
The US government has, over the years, "re-assessed" its relationship with Israel when Israel does not do as it says. The US expects (rightly or wrongly -wrongly and arrogantly in my view) its allies to interpret their own national interests the way US bureaucrats do.
I agree that we need to free Palestine - by getting rid of the terrorists like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah who have stolen their money and land and terrorized them for the last 30 odd years.
Not to get into who's oppressing whom over there, but how much of US deterrence supports oppression of one group or another, and to the extent that it does is that an avoidable instability? Or is dependence on the US to maintain otherwise unstable situations a stabilising factor?
Brilliant and harrowing. I don’t know why you don’t get more likes and comments for this stuff. Keep up the good work.
I cross-posted it. I agree.
thanks to both of you!
The demands on an overstretched U.S. military are growing.
We sent an expeditionary force to Poland that that can face the Russian Army (good move). Then, we sent a carrier and troops close to Israel (was it necessary or political?). Then we sent a task force to the Red Sea (enough to mostly guard the straits, but not enough to eliminate the problem). Many of the ships at sea are overdue for overhaul and crews have been extended several times.
What do we have in reserve for the next crisis?
The American left has been so preoccupied with Trump that they gave Biden et al (yes, this comment is aimed at people like Claire Berlinski) a free hand to screw up American foreign policy.
Exhibit A is the completely free hand the WH was given to tilt towards Iran (including giving billions of dollars). Why? What is the expected outcome?
But it wasn't just Iran. The Biden administration organized one of the most feckless withdrawals ever when they left Afghanistan (the withdrawal was necessary, but so was some competence in managing the withdrawal).
Every American ally is watching the Ukraine (yes, the Republicans are complicit in this fiasco) and drawing the wrong (for us) conclusions.
Asia is watching the Philippine outpost on Second Thomas Shoal as the Chinese blockade the Philippine troops stationed there. The Biden administration talks supportive, but no action has been forthcoming. The Philippines has to be close to reaching an accommodation with the Chinese.
Meanwhile, Taiwan is digesting the implications of all this.
On the domestic front, circa 8 million illegals have entered during Biden's administration - the implications are not clear, except that everyone recognizes that the rule of law is not being enforced and the U.S. population is severely divided.
Last year (10/31/23), our deficit reached $2 trillion. For a peacetime economy that the Biden administration claims is doing very well.
To paraphrase Hemingway:
"How Did You Go become a second rate power?"
"Two Ways. Gradually and Then Suddenly."
We appear to be near the end of "gradually" phase.
Consider the implications according to the Thucydides Trap.
Time for the lefties to stop giving Biden a pass.
Regarding your first comment on US being overstretched. Exactly the issue.
There does not need to be carrier groups in the Mediterranean "deterring" Hezbollah. Hezbollah in Lebanon, like Hamas in Gaza is Israel's problem - and Israel can take care of them (assuming US political support and US willing and able to re-arm). But Iran, the Houthis and other Shiite militias are the free worlds - and hence the US's problem, too. It is in the Red Sea, Gulf of Arabia, Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean that needs US firepower. The goal is deterring China - and that can only be done by regime change in Iran.
I’ve written the same thing on The Neoliberal Standard. We need a massive show of force in “Cold War II” with China to use Niall Ferguson’s phrase to restore deterrence and gain the upper hand. Cracking down on Iran and bombing the nuclear program to smithereens is the perfect opportunity. And it would be sure to deter Xi in the South Pacific. To realize how necessary this is, one only has to consider the implications for world order if, after years of saying we wouldn’t let Iran build nukes, we stood by while Iran built nukes. You can bet your last dollar that Iran will use the capability to invade Saudi Arabia and menace Israel and the Arab world conventionally, using nukes as blackmail exactly like Putin in Europe. But however to bomb Iran and destroy Iran’s militias would be an amazing show of our commitment to our allies and prove to the international order that we care enough about it to prevent nuclear proliferation and contain our enemies. And because we’ll do this, we’ll protect NATO from Russia and the Pacific from China. Like you said, Iran enables Russia and China and North Korea like no other state, but it is the weakest link. The pressure is on for America and Israel being the bigger dogs, to defeat Iran for the sake of everything else.
What do you think of the idea that the carrier groups in the Mediterranean were put there as much to deter Hezbollah as deter Israel from going after Hezbollah, because Iran and its proxies and Israel are strategically equivalent to Biden in his desperation to avoid a “wider regional war?”
I think that is a strong possibility and have written about that. While Biden himself is an old-style Democrat and not anti-Israel per se, it seems that the rest of his administration are Obama Dems who are a bit less friendly to Israel.
I actually disagree with most of the things said here but I agree with this that the carrier groups are in fact to deter Israel not support it. Where I disagree with what is being said here is I think the get tough on Iran boat sailed away all the way back during the 2008 Presidential Election when Obama essentially won on a go soft on Iran platform. Not only that but as is very well known none other than George W Bush himself in the final months essentially started supporting Obama behind the scenes while letting John McCain twist in the wind just like Liz Cheney is now supporting Biden.
Where I challenge people like Jay and Claire is to come up with a domestic political framework that challenges the events that caused George W Bushism to decline as a political ideology in the late 2000s(to the point that George W Bush no longer even believed in it). One theory of mine is actually George W Bush in the end was always the quasi isolationist he originally campaigned as in the late 1990s and thus when Obama offered to support his economic policies in his final year in office it was an easy decision for Bush and his closest supporters like Hank Paulson to throw there support to Obama.
https://youtu.be/5sn8dqhPEg4?si=977SwtXO8v2SzOfO&t=459
We've discussed this before... are we talking an intelligence-gathering deterrent? Because even if the Stern Gang magically shows up and starts lining Palestinians up against the wall, I don't see the US dropping ordinances on Israelis.
Deterrent meaning the US says - if you go against us, it means you don't trust us. An excuse to, as they used to say, "re-assess our relationship" with you
Sorry, I'm still having a hard thing imagining this. Could you give me your most likely example? What would be a distinct "go against us" move?
"Go against us" can mean many things For example
- not including the PA in a future Gaza government
- not stopping in Gaza when the US says to stop
- not agreeing to a Palestinian state on the West Bank
- sending ground troops into Lebanon
The US government has, over the years, "re-assessed" its relationship with Israel when Israel does not do as it says. The US expects (rightly or wrongly -wrongly and arrogantly in my view) its allies to interpret their own national interests the way US bureaucrats do.
1. How exactly have I "given Biden a free hand to screw up policy?" If my screaming at Biden worked, our policy would clearly be quite different.
2. I'm amazed to have been promoted to the "American left."
Free Palestine! The Houthis are doing great work with their blockade. Nothing as usual until Palestine is liberated
I agree that we need to free Palestine - by getting rid of the terrorists like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah who have stolen their money and land and terrorized them for the last 30 odd years.
Not to get into who's oppressing whom over there, but how much of US deterrence supports oppression of one group or another, and to the extent that it does is that an avoidable instability? Or is dependence on the US to maintain otherwise unstable situations a stabilising factor?
Need to get rid of the US colonial entity known as Israel