Follow Dr. Waddy

Tragically, Google has suspended the service that allows blog readers to subscribe by email to the blogs of their choice. This means that, in order to keep up with all the WaddyIsRight excitement, you might want to add "WaddyIsRight.com" to your favorites and visit this site OBSESSIVELY! I can't think of any better use of your time, can you? Alternatively, send me an email at nlwaddy@yahoo.com and I will try to get you subscribed from my end.

Monday, January 24, 2022

WWIII?

 

Friends, speculation is building re: a potential conflict between NATO and Russia over Ukraine.  The problem?  The U.S. attempts to deter Russian aggression aren't especially credible.  Moreover, our European partners, which can exert much greater economic leverage over Russia than we can, are even less credible in their posturing than we are.  Now, I don't minimize the challenges in convincing Russia to leave Ukraine well enough alone.  Russia has a deep, abiding interest in Ukraine, and we can barely find it on a map.  Nevertheless, Mike Pompeo may have a point when he says that the foreign policy weakness of the Biden Administration has been the catalyst for the current crisis.  Where it will all lead is beyond me, but if I had to guess, I'd say: either Russia will back down, having obtained a fig leaf of a Western communiqué to justify its retreat, OR Russia will invade, and we will wag our fingers and levy some economic sanctions that won't do anything for the people of Ukraine, but may precipitate a low-grade Cold War for a decade or two.  All in all, I'd say the chances of WWIII are pretty low.


https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/russia-ukraine-biden-weakness-mike-pompeo

 

https://www.newsmax.com/headline/eu-sanctions-russia-attacks/2022/01/24/id/1053713/ 


In other news, Liz Cheney is one step closer to retirement.  Hooray!


https://nypost.com/2022/01/23/trump-endorsed-candidate-beats-cheney-in-wyoming/

 

And, lest we forget, inflation is still shaping up to be the premier issue in the midterm elections:

 

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/red-hot-inflation-grips-pockets-of-u-s-midwest-and-south-with-rates-over-9-1.1712246 


We had some very good news today: SCOTUS has agreed to consider the constitutionality of race preferences in college admissions.  My hope would be that the Justices will take this opportunity to slap down racial discrimination once and for all.  And make no mistake: anti-white, anti-Asian discrimination is rampant throughout the U.S. economy, even if it's usually covert.


https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/supreme-court-affirmative-action/2022/01/24/id/1053691/

 

Finally, I don't know if this report is true, but, if even parts of it are true, it's a scandal that, had it manifested itself in the Trump family, would have attracted 24/7 media coverage and gasps of outrage galore.  It's good to be a Biden, apparently!


https://neonnettle.com/news/18102-biden-family-took-31-million-from-highest-levels-of-chinese-intelligence-

9 comments:

  1. Dr.Waddy from Jack: I have offered admonitions on the Ukraine situation previously on your blog (thanx). I stick by them but onlybecause the stakes are so high. I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis. But you are almostly certainly right: a Nato - Russia war is very unlikely given all the rock bottom realities. Surely the leaders of Nato countries ,the EU and even our feckless administration have not the recklessness to push the Bear too far. Do they know what too far is?How can they not; those with profound understanding of Russian history, culture and perceptions are readily available (eg. Dr. Stephen Cohen of NYU). Such understanding must reveal a very complex historical, geographical and cultural relationship of which it would be MADNESS for the West to ignore. I do not suggest for a moment that Ukrainian vulnerability to Russian incursion is, especially for ethnic Ukrainians, a terrible possibility, given historically proven Great Russian misrule of other peoples and the joy independence afforded them. But the best we can do for Ukraine is to refrain from giving Russia a fundamental offense, leaving them with no choice ,like presenting or even strongly suggesting Nato in Ukraine, their underbelly, their historic heartland. In the past, in many lands, including 17th century Russia ,it was a mortal insult to touch or even grab a man's beard. Let us not beard the Russians, it is NOT worth it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dr. Waddy from Jack: We kept Stalin from enslaving Western Europe by forming a voluntary and democratic alliance the success of which must have impressed Russia. It stood in marked contrast to their gangsterishly established Warsaw "Pact". Russia, commie or no, has not dared to violate it. In developments ASTOUNDING to a Cold War veteran like me, Russia countenanced the approach of a Nato which now included a theretofore unthinkably united Germany (imagine what that had to have meant to Russia, savaged as it was by Germany within living memory!) to Russia's very borders! In Russia's view, they have given enough. But Ukraine is too much and Russia WILL enforce that, with a vengeance! Let us not unwisely present Russia with that affront! It defies reality!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jack, I couldn't agree more with your wise words re: Russia and Ukraine. The sad part is that all our fulminations about potential Russian aggression may bring about precisely what we want to avoid: a Russian invasion. Usually Putin is only saber-rattling. The more we raise the stakes and threaten Russia, the harder it will be for Putin to show weakness and back down. The irony is that, if we had simply left Ukraine well enough alone, I doubt Russia would have viewed repossessing it as worth the bother.

    Excellent point that Russia's concession in the early 90s that a united Germany could join NATO was an enormous sign of flexibility (and weakness) on their part. Poland and the Baltics are even closer to Russia's heart, needless to say. Why we feel the need to seduce Ukraine as well, I can't imagine. We must believe some of our own Russophobic propaganda? If that's so, then Hillary Clinton might ultimately be to blame for any NATO-Russian conflict that arises... She poked the Bear as few ever have!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dr.Waddy from Jack: Nato need not weaken its forces in countries already in Nato, even on Russia's border. But let's do refrain from provoking the Bear any further.Why not, pray? They are a proud and rugged nation. Do they seek to reconsititute the USSR? Perhaps not; perhaps they mean to secure their borders! Even if they do approximately recreate that entity, we contained them didn't we? But hands off their heartland, no matter what strained relationship it may now have with Russia. We cannot change that!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dr.Waddy from Jack: I would think Hillary's bear bating would have been of two elements. First, in a classic move, provoke the Bear in order to redirect public attention from her radical domestic intentions. Second, should that misfire: why, valiant Commander in Chief Hillary, how dare you doubt her!?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr.Waddy from Jack : "I do not suggest... that Great Russian rule. . . IS NOT a terrible possibility..."

    ReplyDelete
  7. One thing for sure, that whatever happens in The Ukraine, that Russia Army that might invade it, looks like (from what I have seen), that it doesn't have to deal with woke, cancel culture, reset, or CRT Training, and hormone therapy for sex changes. Just a thought. Meanwhile, back to The U.S. Mexico Border, which is being invaded as we speak.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ray from JacK: Good point. The foreign invasion of the US enabled by the far left and its marionette in the White House is going swimmingly! But Ukraine?"Why I'll order 8500 troops to intimidate your 100,000 over there! " says the marionette, -"after all, I won't countenance the defense of OUR border. "

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree, Jack: the redeployment of U.S. forces further east cannot but provoke the Russians and injure their pride. Certainly those forces won't be sent into battle. Their only purpose is to send a message. Does that message work to our advantage? I say no.

    Ray, I'm sure you're right that those Russian soldiers are masculine men, through and through. Now, gender dysphoric as our soldiers may be, I'm sure we're quite capable of defeating the Russians in battle...but why on earth would we want to???

    ReplyDelete