Tag: perpetual war

New York Times admits, then covers up, massive Ukraine casualties

Since January of this year, the New York Times has published dozens of articles claiming that Ukraine’s “spring offensive” would be a decisive turning point in the war with Russia. But this offensive, now six weeks old, has turned into a debacle. While Ukrainian forces have nowhere breached Russia’s main defensive line, tens of thousands of troops have died.

This is the context in which the New York Times published and quickly edited an article presenting a realistic, and therefore nightmarish, depiction of the Ukrainian troops as little more than cannon fodder, “forced into action” to face almost certain death.

Buried on page A9 and not referenced on the front page of the print edition, the extensive and detailed report on Ukraine’s offensive was titled, “Depleted Troops, Unreliable Munitions: Kyiv’s Obstacles in the East.” It included a sub-headline describing the offensive as a “grisly stalemate.”

With equally little notice, that article had been published online the day before under the title, “Weary Soldiers, Unreliable Munitions: Ukraine’s Many Challenges.”

The article presented Ukraine’s offensive as a bloody debacle, in which Ukrainian forces have suffered massive casualties, who are then replaced with older recruits who are “forced” to fight.

The article documented three new, previously undisclosed revelations:

  • There exists a unit in Ukraine with a “200 percent” casualty rate, meaning that all of its members were killed or injured, then replaced with recruits, all of whom were killed or injured.
  • The munitions provided to Ukraine are often so old that they regularly misfire or accidentally detonate, injuring soldiers.
  • After young troops are killed in combat, they are typically replaced with much older people, a sign that Ukraine is running out of fighting-age troops.

Typically, a journalist who uncovered these facts based on firsthand reporting would proclaim each of them a “scoop” and take to Twitter to publicize them.

But the method of the New York Times is that of the buried lede, to take these potentially explosive revelations and stick them in an article on the inside pages, which is quickly removed from the newspaper’s online front page.

In this case, however, merely burying these revelations was insufficient. It was necessary to erase them.

Keep reading

DoD IG: American Weapons in Ukraine Funneled to Arms Traffickers, Criminals

The Pentagon inspector general found the arms Washington sent to Kiev did not undergo the required inspections. A report from the inspector general found weapons the US sent to Ukraine in the hands of criminals and on the black market. 

The Arms Control Act requires the White House to establish an inspection system for weapons the US sells or gifts to third countries. The law mandates the monitoring continues to the end-use of the weapon. In Ukraine, the embassy in Kiev has been assigned responsibility for monitoring the weapons transfers. 

The Department of Defense inspector general report on American weapons transfers to Ukraine from February to September of last year found that legally required monitoring was not taking place. “The DoD is unable to conduct [End Use Monitoring] in Ukraine because completing [End Use Monitoring] in accordance with DoD policy requires in-person access to the defense equipment provided,” it said. “Intelligence methods provide some accountability for observable platforms, such as missiles and helicopters, but smaller items, such as night vision devices, have limited accountability.”

“The DoD OIG found deficiencies in the DoD’s transfer of military equipment to the Government of Ukraine requiring [End Use Monitoring], including Javelin missiles, Javelin Command Launch Units, and night vision devices; and in Ukraine’s security and accountability of US.-provided military equipment requiring [End Use Monitoring],” the report added. 

In a section of the report that is heavily redacted, the inspector general listed some cases of American weapons not making it to their intended recipient. The cases that remained unredacted in the report include: a Moscow-influenced criminal organization that procured grenade launchers and machine guns, a pro-Kev militia that tried to sell dozens of rifles on the black market, and a group of arms traffickers who were selling weapons and ammunition stolen from the front lines.

Keep reading

The Institutionalization of the New Cold War

The 31 countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are taking their victory laps over the latest expansion of the political-military alliance.  The boastful communique for last week’s NATO summit in Lithuania had more than 60 references to nuclear weapons, and promised modernization for NATO’s nuclear powers: the United States, Britain, and France.  There is increased likelihood for the pre-positioning of advanced military weaponry, particularly artillery and air defense systems.  The Baltic Sea will become Lake NATO.

When the NATO countries halt their celebration, it will be time to plan for the next Cold War, which will be far worse than the Cold War that dominated the 1950s and 1960s.  Cold War 2.0 will be more expensive than its predecessor, and far more difficult to bring to a close. The excessive military spending will complicate far more urgent tasks dealing with the climate crisis and the next pandemic, which will eventually occur.  Finally, arms control and disarmament, which was the primary process for pursuing an end to the earlier Cold War, will be more difficult to orchestrate.

The first Cold War was relatively easy for the United States to manage.  The twelve founding members of NATO were compatible in terms of policies and processes; and the perception of the threat was shared.  In Cold War 2.0, the United States will not be as dominant; the alliance will be divided between the western and eastern members of the alliance; and the perception of the threat will vary due to domestic politics and geographic proximity to Russia.  The current difficulties and debates over Ukraine membership; future relations with Russia; and appropriate levels of defense spending are already creating tensions within the alliance.

U.S. supporters of NATO expansion have provided a series of fatuous arguments to defend their position.  The New York Times has trumpeted that “Ukraine has become a testing ground for state-of-the art weapons and information systems, and new ways to use them, that…could shape warfare for generations to come.”  The military-industrial complex couldn’t have written this justification more succinctly.  Right-wing ideologues, such as the Washington Post’s Marc Thiessen, boast that “lessons learned on the Ukrainian battlefield could be used to help Taiwan,” which ignores the differences between an amphibious assault in Taiwan vs. the war of attrition in Ukraine.

Keep reading

Zelensky Blames Failing Counteroffensive On Lack Of Munitions From West, Delayed Training

Despite the row at this month’s NATO summit in Vilnius caused by President Volodymyr Zelensky’s angry tweet, for which he was accused by Western powers (especially the US and UK) of showing ‘ingratitude’, the Ukrainian leader is once again lashing out at his backers. This time, he’s blaming the failing counteroffensive on lack of munitions and delayed training from the West.

“We did have plans to start it in spring. But we didn’t, because, frankly, we had not enough munitions and armaments and not enough brigades properly trained in these weapons,” Zelensky told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria via a translator in an interview which aired Sunday.

He also complained about training programs set up for Ukrainians to operate advanced systems, which are being sponsored and hosted in European countries under NATO guidance. Kiev has long pressed for a more expedited timeline on receiving US F-16 jets as well, but training has been “delayed” for this as well, set to begin next month.

“Still, more” – he continued of the problem – “that the training missions were held outside Ukraine. But, still, we started. And this is important.” Zelensky said these factors have been key to the stalled counteroffensive, especially that Ukraine’s forces are blowing through munitions at a very high pace to keep up with superior Russian fire.

“And because we started it a bit later on, it can be said, and it will be shared truth understood by all the experts that it provided Russia with time to mine all our lands and build several lines of defense. And, definitely, they had even more time than they needed,” he explained.

“Because of that, they built more of those lines. And, really, they had a lot of mines in our fields. Because of that, a slower pace of our counteroffensive actions,” Zelensky added. “We didn’t want to lose our people, our personnel. And our servicemen didn’t want to lose equipment because of that.”

Very early in the counteroffensive in June, he had acknowledged a “slower than expected” advance. And in recent days and weeks, US mainstream media has increasingly featured pessimistic headlines for the first time in the conflict, suggesting the counter offensive is doomed, especially the longer it drags on without delivering a significant punch to Russian front lines.

Zelensky continued in his remarks to CNN, “Yes, I do understand that it’s always better to see victory come sooner. This is what we also want. But the question is the price … of this victory. So, let us not throw people under tanks literally. Let us plan our counteroffensive as our analysts, our intelligence suggests. And some of our residential areas have been liberated already. So, I do believe in our victory.”

The consistent messaging from Kiev forces has been that Western aid is always insufficient – no matter the tens of billions poured in…

Keep reading

US To Announce New $400 Million Ukraine Military Aid Package

The United States plans to announce as soon as Tuesday a new military aid package for Ukraine worth up to $400 million, primarily comprising artillery, air defense missiles, and ground vehicles as Ukraine’s counteroffensive grinds on, three U.S. officials said on Friday.

The United States is not including cluster munitions in this weapons assistance package, two of the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said. The United States first sent dual-purpose improved conventional munitions—a cluster munition fired from a 155 millimeter Howitzer cannon—to Ukraine earlier in July.

Included in the package are several Stryker armored personnel carriers, mine clearing equipment, munitions for National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems, munitions for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, anti-tank weapons including TOW and Javelin, and munitions for Patriot and Stinger anti-aircraft systems, according to the officials.

The package was still being finalized and could change.

Keep reading

Putin Issues Stark Warning To Poland And NATO

Putin held a video conference on Thursday with members of Russia’s Security Council. I hope folks in the West pay attention to what he said, so I’m presenting the entirety of his remarks following a presentation by the Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service.

Based on public source information and Russia-collected intelligence, Russia believes that Poland plans to seize Ukrainian territory west of the Dnieper River as Ukraine’s much-ballyhooed counter-offensive collapses.

Let me give you Putin’s bottom line up front:

Regarding the policy of the Ukrainian regime, it is none of our business. If they want to relinquish or sell off something in order to pay their bosses, as traitors usually do, that’s their business. We will not interfere.

But Belarus is part of the Union State, and launching an aggression against Belarus would mean launching an aggression against the Russian Federation. We will respond to that with all the resources available to us.

Vladimir Putin is not a weak, spineless creature like Barack Obama or Joe Biden. He does not make idle threats and does not succumb to emotion.

Keep reading

Ukraine To Receive F-16s By End Of Year, Kirby Says

Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the National Security Council John Kirby suggested in a Fox News interview Thursday that Ukraine could received US F-16 fighter jets way ahead of schedule. 

“Most likely, the F-16s will arrive in Ukraine before the end of the year. However, we do not believe that F-16s alone can alter the situation on the battlefield,” Kirby said.

Very likely, training for Ukrainian pilots—which hasn’t even begun yet (at least officially) given NATO press statements have indicated the Denmark-bases training program is set to begin in August—won’t be complete by then.

Top Zelensky officials, including the Ukrainian president himself, have pleaded for more advanced weaponry to arrive on the battlefield sooner. Amid what’s increasingly acknowledged in mainstream press as a failing counteroffensive, Ukraine’s military leaders have urged ‘superiority of the skies’. 

But it’s clear that Kirby has downplayed that even Western fighter jets will be a major game-changer. He also emphasized in the interview that the most immediate need remains greater amounts of artillery ammunition, given especially the superior supplies which the Russians possess.

Kirby listed out what he called the “four A’s”… as “artillery, ammunition, air defense and armor—tanks.”

Ukrainian media too has begun to acknowledge that Western fighters may have little impact on the overall negative course of the counteroffensive:

A week ago, Lieutenant General Douglas Sims said that conditions for a transfer of F-16s are not “ideal.” He stressed that Russians still have air defense capability, hinting that the number of jets that can arrive will not change the course of the counteroffensive.

President Putin and Kremlin officials have said West-supplied jets will “burn” just like other foreign equipment. They’ve also warned that NATO is “playing with fire” in approving them for the Ukrainians.

Keep reading

The Future Of AI Is War… And Human Extinction As Collateral Damage

A world in which machines governed by artificial intelligence (AI) systematically replace human beings in most business, industrial, and professional functions is horrifying to imagine. After all, as prominent computer scientists have been warning us, AI-governed systems are prone to critical errors and inexplicable “hallucinations,” resulting in potentially catastrophic outcomes.

But there’s an even more dangerous scenario imaginable from the proliferation of super-intelligent machines: the possibility that those nonhuman entities could end up fighting one another, obliterating all human life in the process.

The notion that super-intelligent computers might run amok and slaughter humans has, of course, long been a staple of popular culture. In the prophetic 1983 film “WarGames,” a supercomputer known as WOPR (for War Operation Plan Response and, not surprisingly, pronounced “whopper”) nearly provokes a catastrophic nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union before being disabled by a teenage hacker (played by Matthew Broderick). The “Terminator” movie franchise, beginning with the original 1984 film, similarly envisioned a self-aware supercomputer called “Skynet” that, like WOPR, was designed to control U.S. nuclear weapons but chooses instead to wipe out humanity, viewing us as a threat to its existence.

Though once confined to the realm of science fiction, the concept of supercomputers killing humans has now become a distinct possibility in the very real world of the near future. In addition to developing a wide variety of “autonomous,” or robotic combat devices, the major military powers are also rushing to create automated battlefield decision-making systems, or what might be called “robot generals.” In wars in the not-too-distant future, such AI-powered systems could be deployed to deliver combat orders to American soldiers, dictating where, when, and how they kill enemy troops or take fire from their opponents. In some scenarios, robot decision-makers could even end up exercising control over America’s atomic weapons, potentially allowing them to ignite a nuclear war resulting in humanity’s demise.

Now, take a breath for a moment. The installation of an AI-powered command-and-control (C2) system like this may seem a distant possibility. Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Defense is working hard to develop the required hardware and software in a systematic, increasingly rapid fashion. In its budget submission for 2023, for example, the Air Force requested $231 million to develop the Advanced Battlefield Management System (ABMS), a complex network of sensors and AI-enabled computers designed to collect and interpret data on enemy operations and provide pilots and ground forces with a menu of optimal attack options. As the technology advances, the system will be capable of sending “fire” instructions directly to “shooters,” largely bypassing human control.

“A machine-to-machine data exchange tool that provides options for deterrence, or for on-ramp [a military show-of-force] or early engagement,” was how Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology, and logistics, described the ABMS system in a 2020 interview. Suggesting that “we do need to change the name” as the system evolves, Roper added, “I think Skynet is out, as much as I would love doing that as a sci-fi thing. I just don’t think we can go there.”

And while he can’t go there, that’s just where the rest of us may, indeed, be going.

Mind you, that’s only the start. In fact, the Air Force’s ABMS is intended to constitute the nucleus of a larger constellation of sensors and computers that will connect all U.S. combat forces, the Joint All-Domain Command-and-Control System (JADC2, pronounced “Jad-C-two”). “JADC2 intends to enable commanders to make better decisions by collecting data from numerous sensors, processing the data using artificial intelligence algorithms to identify targets, then recommending the optimal weapon… to engage the target,” the Congressional Research Service reported in 2022.

Keep reading

Lockheed Martin Predicts Strong Profits as Global Instability Rises

Lockheed Martin believes global instability is driving demand and sees an increase in annual profits. Washington’s proxy war in Ukraine has caused an increase in arms spending among NATO members, boosting weapons makers’ stock prices. 

On Tuesday, Lockheed raised its annual profit and sales outlook on strong demand for military equipment. After making the announcement, the company’s stock price increased by one percent. Reuters reports, “[Lockheed] expects full-year net sales to be between $66.25 billion and $66.75 billion, up from its earlier forecast of $65 billion to $66 billion.”

The billions in profit are driven by sales of big-ticket systems like the F-35. However, Lockheed has struggled to produce F-35s that can perform its promised abilities. In May, the government found the planes’ engines have a serious problem dealing with heat. “The F-35’s engine lacks the ability to properly manage the heat generated by the aircraft’s systems,” POGO reported. “That increases the engine’s wear, and auditors now estimate the extra maintenance will add $38 billion to the program’s life-cycle costs.”

The arms maker has additionally experienced a boost in demand for smaller systems, like the Javelin anti-tank missile. The White House has shipped thousands of Javelin systems to Kiev since Joe Biden took office. 

Keep reading