Friends, peace is breaking out in the Middle East, and many observers are inclined to credit...Donald Trump??? The mainstream media will be gnashing its teeth, for sure. The release of the hostages opens what we hope will be a new and more pacific chapter in Israel's relations with Palestinians. With any luck, this is the beginning of the end of Hamas as well. Bravo, DJT! And, as he pointed out, kudos to Marco Rubio, who did a lot of the heavy lifting.
Somewhat negating the positive mood today is ongoing talk of escalating the Russia-Ukraine War by sending Ukraine longer-range missiles with which to strike deep inside Mother Russia. From my perspective, the Trump policy on the Russia-Ukraine War is mostly a continuation of the Biden policy...only more provocative and, arguably, more reckless. My hope is that this is all trash talking designed to motivate Russia to accept a deal. Otherwise, this nasty war could get nastier.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93xpqgzkv0o
Finally, Happy Birthday to the United States Navy, which celebrates 250 years of protecting the liberties and commerce of the American people. The USA still rules the waves, as far as we know, although developments in missile technology, and our reliance on Chinese exports of rare earths and critical technology, leave us guessing about how long our naval predominance will last.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/10/13/the-250th-anniversary-of-the-united-states-navy-began/
Dr. Waddy from Jack: My what petulant brats our President's reflexive domestic castigators are proven to be in the light of his very possibly monumental achievement in this Middle East rapprochement. Advocates for Palestinian Arabs must accede to the fact that they will never achieve the justice they seek through violence. An apparent and perhaps forming majority of the Middle East and Muslim world is beyond war weary of the seemingly endless mayhem. The out and out Jew haters among Israel's myriad critics , who cynically and viciously use the cause of some of the Palestinians as a cover for their atavistic, neomedieval savagery toward the Jewish nation ,need to "step off!" Israel is here to stay and the world is graced by it. And I believe that Palestinians can prosper by getting along with Israel's high civilization; they have been terribly misused by hate governed Iran under its present regime and by many of their Arab neighbors.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Perhaps our greatest naval strength right now is in our aircraft carriers. They are ideal for projecting decisive firepower into many settings and ours are the most powerful in the world. For awhile I thought maybe we were relying on them too long ( the old saw against "always getting ready for the last war"; eg. prior to 1941 we thought the battleship still ruled). But recently the Brits built two new super carriers and they usually know what they are doing. China, India, S.Korea and Japan have all recently built carriers of helos and or vertical take off and landing planes and or straight ahead conventional carrier aircraft. Since carriers are extremely expensive , these countries must have well thought out reasons for building them but I do not think they include carrier to carrier fights with us like we had with the Japanese in WWII. Then again, India, allied with Japan and S. Korea, could counter Chinese carrier strength should we decide to withdraw from the Western Pacific.
ReplyDeleteThough I think a decisive no holds barred nuclear war could take place at sea and not necessarily bring on a general nuclear exchange on the homelands or their allies. I do think carriers would not last long. They can be vaporized by a single low yield nuke. Such missiles or torpedos or perhaps drones can be launched from a wide variety of vessels. All things considered , I think submarines would emerge as the capital ships. I've read that our submarines are superior to those of China so we'd still be in it. As for the Russians, the Ukrainians took it to them pretty well in the Black Sea. Russia has never been able to become a great sea power, though they have tried. Their strongest effort came in the 1970's and '80s when they actually tried to best the U.S. Navy.(In doing so they helped bring on the economic and political collapse of the USSR. ) But the carriers they built were just like their cars; they were quick rusting , constantly breakdown prone jalopies.
Now if we engaged China relatively near the Eastern Chinese littoral, we would also have their formidable land based antiship missile array to contend with. It might be that our Admirals would choose not to risk the carriers thereby or that they would launch early attacks on the missile bases or that they would rely on our subs to decimate a Chinese invasion fleet off Taiwan. Attacks on the Chinese mainland would almost certainly bring retaliation against America. That's what could be at stake in defending Taiwan. Since Taiwan may be the keystone to the crescent of seafaring nations which face China in the East and South China Seas and the Pacific and Indian Oceans ,that could be a momentous choice for both America and China. Key to discerning Chinese intent is their long standing stance: if it was once Chinese it will be Chinese again. Just sayin'. . .
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I do not think Russia's rock bottom, irrevocable stance and purpose has changed since it invaded Ukraine. It will not tolerate Ukrainian membership in Nato and if it sees that as a distinct possibility it will not relent. For Russia this is a fundamental national security issue which can be reasonably compared to our attitude toward Russian IRBMs in Cuba in 1962.
ReplyDeleteDo the Russians believe that the military victory our President now thinks could be within Ukraine's ability would necessarily result in Ukrainian membership in Nato? If so I think Russia will use any means necessary to prevent it.
Our country's prestige and the realization that our President is unapologetically willing to use our immense power are very much credited by his brilliant negotiation of the tentative Middle East peace arrangement. Can it motivate Russia to back down on its fundamental goal in this war?
Our President is a gutsy and brilliant negotiator and his mention of the provision of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine could be a ploy to get Russia to relent from its conviction that Ukraine must be under its control to prevent a membership in Nato which would mandate general war should Russia ever again prosecute its fundamental national security concerns in Ukraine. Our President might even be willing to back down from it if necessary. But its a very dangerous game and does OUR fundamental national security require us to play it?! Mr. Medvedev's assertion that Russia cannot know whether or not a Tomahawk missile (or by implication, a barrage of them ) contains a nuclear warhead must be taken dead seriously. A regional "mutual assured destruction"response could conceivably precede the Tomahawk (s) ' arrival. Then what?
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Can we be absolutely sure Ukraine gave up all of its nuclear warheads after the fall of the USSR?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack : I think President Trump's achievement is enhanced by the fact that he had to deal with the premature "recognition" of a non existent Palestinian state by much of the world, including close allies of ours.
ReplyDeleteEstablishment of a Palestinian state must be preceded by complete confidence by Israel that it will not be a threat to Israel. That can only be assured by a protracted period of complete nonaggression toward Israel on the part of whatever entity controls Palestinian conduct.
I don't think Israel would trust any other nation , including us and CERTAINLY not a U.N. a shameful part of which is openly and savagely opposed to Israel's physical existence. Nor can it trust even us. Our very far left, which has proven its Jew hating bonafides by tolerating the Squad and by encouraging the detestable oppression of Jews on the elite campuses it commands, may be on the ascendent and Israel cannot bet its life against the possibility of it regaining the White House.
And the neomedieval Jew loathing Iranian regime must be prevented from exercising any power outside of its borders. Its recent quasi alliance with N.Korea, China and Russia could complicate that. Any effort by the Iranian people to shake off their oppressive theocracy must be supported by as much of the civilized world as possible.
Perhaps , just maybe, the historical significance of this Middle East peace development can be much further glorified by the final death of that ancient evil: murderous hatred of Judaism, its people and its magnificent civilization, even here in the U.S.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: In saying that Israel cannot trust us I do not in any way mean to gainsay our magnificent support for Israel under this great President of ours. Israel's gratitude is a grand thing to see; our America has done itself proud by backing this courageous and gallant country.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Let me hasten to commend to you an essay in the journal Foreign Affairs for Nov./Dec. 2025 , titled The Autumn of the Ayatollahs: what kind of change is coming to Iran? It is cited in RealClearPolitics for October 15. I will not attempt to reprise the details but it offers a very creditable exposition on what it describes as a probable change in direction, if not regime, perhaps close at hand in Iran. It offers Russian, Chinese, Pakistani and other plausible models or suppositions for what it strongly predicts will be governmental change in Iran.
ReplyDeleteThis article matters, I think: first: its in Foreign Affairs , a scholarly periodical yet accessible by amateurs like me, which once changed the world by publishing George F. Kennan's call for "containment" of Soviet Communism in the late '40s. I would value the opinion of a professional intellectual as to whether Foreign Affairs still deserves this cachet.
Second: because the possibility of Iran giving up its regime's fanatic devotion to the annihilation of Israel is a vital factor in bringing peace and maybe even prosperity to the Middle East, to the benefit of the world.
Jack, your suggestion that WWIII could be fought purely at sea, and would consist mainly of nuclear strikes on naval assets, intrigues me. Seems that such a war, given the vulnerability of any ship, including carriers, to nukes, and missiles, and drones, could result in the effective removal of, well, EVERY navy from the high seas. Where would that leave us? Perhaps the precondition for projecting power at sea, via nuclear missiles, though, would be satellites, and those could be even more vulnerable than the ships! Long story short: WWIII could be very different from what Hollywood imagines.
ReplyDeleteGood point: Russia may decide to end the war in Ukraine once and for all with nuclear weapons, if it feels that Western escalation has no limit and its survival is in doubt. Who can say what would push them over the edge?
Jack, I suppose it's possible that Ukraine retains some nukes, but what on earth would be the point if no one knows about them?
Jack, I'm afraid I'm in no position to assess the credibility of Foreign Affairs as a publication. My (utterly uninformed) impression is that it is a mouthpiece of the establishment, which suggests that it is very, very capable of falling flat on its face, analytically speaking. Is Iran near a tipping point? That would surprise me, but lots of things surprise me, and sometimes in a pleasant way...
Dr. Waddy from Jack: BTW: In the current situation at Rutgers, I wish Turning Point USA would emphasize this: Rutgers is a state university. I'm sure the vast majority of New Jersey taxpayers would not want to see someone paid by their taxes and educating their youth advocating the cause of Antifa at their premier state school, as is plausibly alleged. And as usual, when the far left bleats about academic freedom it is only THEIR freedom they are in a tizzy about. By their lights anything which contradicts their beliefs deserves no such protection and should be suppressed "by any means necessary".
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Good point about the possible consequences of a naval nuclear war. Perhaps space, both physical and electronic, is a bout to become the new ocean in this respect. Subs may become readily detectable.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Good point also about possible (?) Ukrainian nukes. Would Russia have so severely savaged a country it knows still has some? Maybe Ukraine does and there is a mutual defacto MAD "understanding" obtaining. Perhaps a Ukraine in extremis would threaten their use even if they are bluffing ;most unlikely, Russia does not know for sure whether they do or don't have them . . . .
ReplyDelete