Now that Joe is putting together another $800 million package for Ukraine, this will altogether amount to $16 billion in military aid that we have given the Zelensky government since the fighting with Russia first began. So, I think it’s safe to say that the war between Ukraine and Russia is really a conflict between the United States and Russia, with Ukraine as our ally supplying the troops while we come up with the munitions and the guns.
I notice there’s a big deal being made out of the shipment of what are called ‘cluster bombs,’ which allegedly create serious injuries for civilians and can wind up sitting in the ground unexploded and being potentially dangerous for years. According to CNN, these bombs have been stockpiled in our arsenal since 2016, when we stopped using them because of humanitarian concerns.
In other words, it’s not a humanitarian issue if you kill soldiers in a war; it’s only a humanitarian problem if you kill humans who aren’t walking around with guns. That’s an interesting distinction, wouldn’t you say?
Meanwhile, the CNN article, put together by the – ready? – network’s Senior Global Military Affairs Writer, says these weapons were first developed and used in World War II. That so?
Maybe the CNN military expert should read Robert Bruce’s book, Lincoln and the Tools of War, which describes how Lincoln had a fund which he used to reward inventors who came to the White House and demonstrated new weapons and munitions which could be used in the Civil War.
One of these new inventions, which was demonstrated on the lawn outside the White House, was a cluster bomb, which spread man-killing shrapnel in a circle around the point where the bomb went off. It was noted by an onlooker that when the device exploded, Lincoln jumped for joy, clicked his heels together and clapped his hands.
Maybe with the exception of airpower and nuclear energy, just about everything the United States has contributed to the ‘art’ of modern warfare first came about during the Civil War. I’m not just talking about weapons, like the lever-action rifle or the submarine. I’m also talking about how warfare is defined when a specific military conflict comes to an end.
In the ‘olden days,’ when two countries decided that enough was enough on the battlefield, a truce was called and both sides then sat down to negotiate the peace. When Lee showed up at Appomattox and walked up to Grant on the porch of the courthouse, they shook hands and then Lee asked for a copy of the surrender ‘terms.’
Grant looked around for a moment, then turned back to Lee and said, “The surrender of the Army of Virginia is unconditional General. There are no terms.”
Lee looked perplexed, shook his head back and forth, then gathered his thoughts and said, “Could the boys take their horses back with them when they go home? Without horses they won’t be able to plow the fields and plant next year’s corn. People will starve.”
Grant shrugged and replied: “General, you can take your horse home.”
This is basically what we told the Japanese on the deck of the battleship Missouri when World War II ended in 1945. If the Japanese hadn’t agreed to a complete, total, and unconditional surrender, we could have always dropped another ‘big one’ like the big ones we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And I love how there’s all this current talk about how Putin might use nuclear weapons in his military assault on Ukraine. According to another military expert, this time a guy at Harvard’s Kennedy School, we have -ready? – a “77-year tradition, some call it a taboo, of non-use of nuclear weapons.”
Gee, I wonder how that ‘tradition’ got started, okay?
There is no country in the entire world which has even come remotely close to developing and deploying the kinds of weapons that the United States has developed for ending human life. Don’t believe me? Show me another country which has the F-35.
Which is why as long as its other countries whose lives get lost in a military conflict, the United States will win every war every time out.