What, exactly, is the U.S. government’s plan for Ukraine?

American officials keep saying they won’t negotiate with Russia, but now they’re also leaking a belief that Ukraine can’t win. If both strategies are off the table, what exactly is the American plan?https://t.co/JjeYbdrFT6

— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) October 13, 2022

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi writes, “Fifteen years ago, in a July 2007 Democratic primary debate in Charleston, South Carolina, Senator Barack Obama won applause by saying sure, he’d meet with the leaders of countries like Iran, Cuba, and North Korea. ‘The notion that somehow not talking the country is punishment to them’ was ridiculous, he said, adding even JFK and Reagan were willing to talk to the Soviets.

‘They understood that we may not trust them, and they may pose an extraordinary danger,’ Obama said. ‘But we have the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.’

Obama’s line won him new admirers and helped dent progressive support for frontrunner Hillary Clinton. The episode is now mostly forgotten, as Talking to Bad People has again been deemed forbidden, even by former liberals, perhaps especially by them, even with the country suddenly at greater risk of nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban Missile crisis.

These dynamics resurfaced in a confusing way this week. To no one’s surprise the Biden administration continued to say it won’t negotiate with Russia, but it suddenly also began leaking a belief that it doesn’t think fighting will work, either. If both strategies are off the table, what exactly are we doing?”

Read the entire column.

The post What, exactly, is the U.S. government’s plan for Ukraine? appeared first on Liberty Tree.

Ukraine set to become largest recipient of U.S. military assistance in a century

I’ve always fought to protect tax dollars from going towards wasteful spending overseas and instead prioritize them for needs here in Kentucky. I’m proud of the strength and resilience in our Commonwealth and I’ll continue to support Kentucky. pic.twitter.com/HiZGF3ZGdk

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) October 5, 2022

As Floridians recover from Hurricane Ian and Kentucky contends with major tornado damage, President Biden just pledged another $625 million of our taxpayer dollars to Ukraine on top of the billions and billions already sent.

Ukraine is now set to become the largest recipient of American military assistance in a century.

The Intercept reported last month, “Since Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in February, the U.S. government has pumped more money and weapons into supporting the Ukrainian military than it sent in 2020 to Afghanistan, Israel, and Egypt combined — surpassing in a matter of months three of the largest recipients of U.S. military aid in history…”

“Analysts estimate that Ukraine, already the largest recipient of U.S. security assistance in Europe since 2014, is well on track to become the largest recipient of U.S. security assistance of the century altogether.” the report continued.

The Intercept noted how unprecedented this foreign spending was, “There is little precedent for the breakneck pace and scale of U.S. spending on Ukraine. ‘It’s more than the peak it paid to Afghanistan by a long shot and many times more than aid to Israel,’ William Hartung, senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute, told The Intercept. ‘And it’s somewhat unique that they’ve been arming a country where there are two nation states at war.”

Read the entire story.

The post We need less U.S. tax dollars going overseas. Put America First appeared first on Liberty Tree.

On Monday, a video clip of Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs saying he believed the United States more likely destroyed the Nord Stream pipeline than U.S. government claims that Russia did.

During an interview on Bloomberg TV, Sachs delved into “the destruction of the Nord Stream Pipeline, which I would bet was a U.S. action, perhaps U.S. and Poland. That is speculation.”

The Bloomberg host interjected, “Jeff, we’ve got to stop there. Why do you feel that was a U.S. action? What evidence do you have of that?”

Sachs proceeded to give the audience an earful.

CNBC host panics when guest speculates that the Nord Stream pipeline bombing was a “U.S. operation.”

The guest is asked to back up his statement… and he does pic.twitter.com/TGHYt9aC8C

— Young Americans for Liberty (@YALiberty) October 3, 2022

Sachs explained, “Well, first, there is direct radar evidence that U.S. military helicopters that are normally based in Gdansk were circling over this area. We also had the threat from the U.S. [President Biden] earlier this year that ‘one way or another we are going to end Nord Stream.”

“We also had a remarkable statement from Sec. Blinken last Friday in a press conference where he said ‘this is also a tremendous opportunity,” Sachs continued. “That’s a strange way to talk if you’re worried about piracy on the international infrastructure of vital significance.”

“I know it runs counter to our narrative, you’re not allowed to say these things in the West, but the fact of the matter is all over the world when I talk to people, they think the U.S. did it,” he admitted. “Even reporters on our papers that are involved tell me ‘of course’ [the U.S. did it], but it doesn’t show up in our media.”

Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald wondered why journalists weren’t asking who blew up Nord Stream rather than just accepting government claims at face value.

Nothing angers employees of large Western media corporations more than suggestions that US intelligence services may not be telling the truth and might do bad things.

The ideology of corporate media isn’t so much “left” or “right” as it is subservience to establishment power. https://t.co/XNaI4dmiuU

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 3, 2022

Some journalists have asked questions.

Tucker Carlson questions what happened to the Nord Stream pipeline:

“Did the Biden administration really do this?”

OMGosh, just listen — the thought of this is horrifying!pic.twitter.com/bxf5nsSD10

— NEWSNANCY (@NewsNancy9) September 28, 2022

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the bombing of the pipelines “offers a tremendous opportunity” three days before saying bombing them was “in no one’s interest.”

Sec. State Blinken: Nordstream Bombing ‘Offers Tremendous Opportunity’ – today on the Liberty Report:https://t.co/zAzhTd1PHy

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) October 3, 2022

Blinken Sept 27: Sabotage of Nord Stream gas pipelines “in no one’s interest”

Blinken Sept 30: Destruction of pipelines a “tremendous strategic opportunity” to “pursue the transition to renewables” pic.twitter.com/pioYYU8PZz

— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) October 2, 2022

Back in January, the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nulan said that “Nord Stream 2 will not move forward” if Russia invaded Ukraine.

President Joe Biden said the U.S. “would bring and end” to Nord Stream

“If Russia invades…then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.” – President Joe Biden.

pic.twitter.com/B96Q7Qffny

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) September 27, 2022

That’s a lot to work with. There should be more questions. Not less.

The post Economist Jeffrey Sachs says U.S. likely blew up Nord Stream: ‘You’re not allowed to say these things in the West’ appeared first on Liberty Tree.

Sanctions almost always punish innocent citizens more than the military and political leaders of countries. https://t.co/tOwqZnqCfo

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) January 27, 2022

The post Sanctions always punish innocent citizens appeared first on Liberty Tree.

“It is no secret that I have had a lot of foreign policy disagreements with the bipartisan War Caucus in Washington D.C. during my time in office. From Iraq to Syria, and Yemen to Afghanistan, it seems that there is always a war they want to be in.

I was heartened when President Trump spoke of stopping our ‘endless wars’ and I was hoping for more restraint from President Biden. Unfortunately, that wasn’t his history and it doesn’t seem to be his current direction. The endless wars are ramping up again even as I write today.

Let’s hope diplomacy succeeds before we are dragged into yet another war. https://t.co/h1XoA7EnZC

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 26, 2022

The war-as-first-resort crowd, including the Biden Administration, put 8,500 troops on heightened alert for possible deployment to Eastern Europe. Folly best describes the idea of sending a small contingent off to a potentially big war. This mistake was made in Syria and elsewhere in recent years…

From our perspective, Ukraine should not and cannot be our problem to solve. It is not our place to defend them in a struggle with their longtime adversary, Russia. There is no national security interest for the United States…

The neocons are trying to fool people that NATO entrance would lead to deterrence and peace, when in fact it is a recipe for war and disaster.”

Read the entire column.

aaaa

The post The U.S. shouldn’t be dragged into another war appeared first on Liberty Tree.

From my latest at Based Politics, “Carlson brought up two important points. For one, why should Americans die because of a conflict between Russia and Ukraine? Secondly, he reminded viewers that elites in both parties will clamor for war every time an international conflict arises.

Carlson is on to something. For the Right, an ‘America First’ foreign policy should mean putting actual Americans before elites’ interests and ideologies…

Most sensible people likely recoil at the idea of risking putting American lives on the line over Ukraine.

Yet to the degree that the American public can be convinced to support a war, how they consume their news—including mostly Republican and independent voters watching big time players like Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham—can play an important role.

Yes, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had 9/11 as justification for their wars, but those who lived through it remember how much the conservative-leaning Fox News pushed for our military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. That two of the top personalities at Fox News now put out a non-interventionist message—something anti-war conservatives and libertarians couldn’t have fathomed 15 years ago—is a sight to behold.

Former President Donald Trump blew up the old definition of what constitutes a conservative or Republican foreign policy. Today, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham can’t say ‘America First’ enough…”

Read the entire column.

The post Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham put ‘America First’ on Russia-Ukraine appeared first on Liberty Tree.

FEE’s Tom Mullen writes, “It makes not one iota of difference to Americans living in the United States if Russia annexed all of Ukraine, much less Crimea. Washington’s interests in the region are purely imperial and contrary to those of most U.S. citizens. It is also questionable that the U.S. could win a limited conflict in the region against Russia, given the logistics.

Tensions between the US and Russia are needlessly heating up again over Ukraine. The results could be grave. https://t.co/KXQsbso8Uc

— FEE (@feeonline) January 12, 2022

It is equally unrealistic that Russia could win a full-scale conventional war against NATO. The U.S. alone had a military budget in 2020 more than ten times that of Russia. That would leave Russia with only one alternative before surrender.

Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Washington has thought of itself as the ‘shining city on the hill’ leading a ‘new world order’ of democracy and peace. Considering its recent exploits in the Middle East and Ukraine, in 2021 it more resembles a drunk bully stumbling around the world slurring its words and picking fights with smaller opponents.”

Read the entire column.

The post DC’s stance on Ukraine is as divorced from reality as its COVID regime appeared first on Liberty Tree.

My latest at The American Conservative, “Sanction this. Sanction that. The Department of the Treasury is currently administering dozens of sanction programs designed to change the behavior of certain countries.

And yet, no one seems to ask the important question: Do sanctions promote peace and understanding or escalate tensions between nations? What behavior has China modified since the U.S. began sanctions? Has Russia changed her behavior? Has Russia given back Crimea?

NEW from @RandPaul: “The U.S. embargo of Cuba has now endured for more than 60 years without any evidence of a change in regime or even a change in the regime’s policy.” https://t.co/lg39CcAUTZ

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) January 10, 2022

Sanctions, though lacking in proof of effectiveness, are very popular with both parties. Embargoes, sanctions’ big brother, also garner bipartisan enthusiasm. The U.S. embargo of Cuba has now endured for more than 60 years without any evidence of a change in regime or even a change in the regime’s policy…

Over the past decade Congress and presidents have heaped sanctions on Russia and China. When I’ve asked State Department officials to reveal what behavioral changes have come about as a result of sanctions, I’ve gotten only blank stares. Now the sanctionistas want to sanction an already completed pipeline. But what behavior are they asking Russia to change? What specifically is Russia being asked? What Russian action is necessary for the sanctions to end?”

Read the entire column.

The post New Russia sanctions are not about security appeared first on Liberty Tree.

BizPacReview reports, “It seems like years ago that we were hearing that Trump is colluding with Russia, that he wouldn’t have won the election without Russia, that his whole presidency was a Putin plot,’ he continued, a reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

This, though, is what gives me hope. @rustyrockets took my Substack reporting on the indictment of Hillary’s lawyer and what it shows about the lies of corporate outlets. He produced a short YouTube video report. In 3 days, it has almost 2 million views:https://t.co/Cs7XtlDwYB

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) September 27, 2021

‘Well, there’s now evidence that it was the Clinton campaign and Hillary Clinton acolytes that were directly involved in the generation of what has proven to be an conspiracy, untrue’ Brand continued. ‘Think about how much media you watched.’

‘Me, a person who I think, broadly speaking, is from the left, a liberal, certainly not a Trump supporter or Republican…I find myself in awe, gobsmacked, flabbergasted, and startled by these revelations that ‘Russiagate’ was a Democratic conspiracy,’ Brand added.”

The post Russell Brand: ‘Russiagate’ created by the Hillary Clinton campaign appeared first on Liberty Tree.