The Fall of Assad and Syria What does it mean for the U.S., Israel and the West?

 The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was an embarrassment of monumental proportions. It not only left the Taliban back in charge of the government and the people (especially the women) worst off, Al Qaeda was still militarily and politically operational. We left so much military equipment behind, that Afghanistan went from being a country of no military significance to being one of the most powerful countries in the region!    

To add insult to injury, it now appears that Al Qaida will emerge as the controlling power in post Assad Syria. It's worth mentioning, that while we were battling Al Qaeda in Afghanistan for 20 years, following the cowardly attack on 9/11, the U.S. was arming and supporting Al Qaida's efforts, albeit under the names "Jabhat al-Nusra Front" and "Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham'  (aka"HTS" ) in Syria to overthrow President Bashar Assad.

Of course, ISIS/ISIL is back. They've already reoccupied the Syrian city of Homs and look to further expand. To give you an idea as to their intentions, all one needs to do is look at their name--- the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. On September 24, 2014, the Obama Administration officially announced they would be more "hands on" in Syria in order to oust ISIS.  

At about the same time, the CIA began using Syria as one of its base of operations, starting from the mid-1990s and extending well into the 2000's, for its "extraordinary renditions" (aka "unofficial kidnappings") of so-called "ghost detainees" (ISIS and Al Qaeda fighters, cleric, and supporters) for the purpose of extreme interrogation methods.

In 2008, the CIA formed the "Damascus Community School" to lure anti-Assad groups, officials, and civilians (such as teachers and professors) away from the pro-Soviet orbit. They also started funded and training various paramilitary units to oppose Assad, as well as pro-Iranian terrorist organizations. It should be mentioned that the CIA has been active in Syria since 1949 when it helped plan the March Coup of 1949. Syria was the CIA's first "test case" for overthrowing governments not seen as favorable to U.S. national interests.

Using the code name "Operation Inherent Resolve" (my how they do love their secret code names), the U.S. vowed to fight ISIS through the Syrian Free Army (aka "Revolutionary Commando Army" or "RCA") and the Kurdish led Syrian Democratic Front, led by the Kurdish "Popular Protection Units", which are regarded as a terrorist organization by Qatar and Turkey (one nation's terrorists is another nation's liberators). Other groups involved in the fighting include Syrian National Army and the Turkish Armed Forces.

Now, why would we underwrite groups to overthrow the government of President Bashar Assad? The answer is really simply. Syria has been Russia's regional ally for decades. Syria is to Russia what Israel is to the United States. Of course, the U.S. made the usual allegations about the people fighting for their democracy and so forth, the truth was to simply remove the pro-Russian Assad Government, secure access to Syrian oil and gas, and further isolate Iran.

Iran is the center piece in this regional game of chess. The neocons goal all along has been to take control of Iraq and Afghanistan, and destabilize Syria.  Then, with our Arab allies, isolate and ultimately strangle the Iranian government. Well, Iraq is free of Saddam but it's far from stable. However, like the Russians before us,  we were handed our eviction notice by the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan while Iran remains still standing.  

In fact, Iran is hard at work developing a nuclear bomb and delivery system to "wipe Israel off the map, even at the cost of Iran being vaporized.  In addition, the Iranians have helped to underwrite and arm terrorist groups like the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, Boko Harem in Africa, and terrorist organizations in Yemen, Libya, Sudan, and elsewhere. 

The only glimmer about the Assad Government's fall is that Russia is without its primary regional ally. The problem is that Al Qaeda, which has already launched rockets at Israel while fighting the Syrian military, will now be that much closer to Israel and will have another shot at a Islamic State.

Israel has used the chaos in the aftermath of President Bashar Assad's departure, to expand its presence from the 1973 UN imposed buffer zone with Syria by redeploying its troops from the top of the Golan Heights to new positions just a few miles on the other side of the Golan mountains, thus pushing Al Qaeda's Iranian supplied missiles a little further back. 

Not unexpectedly, the rest of the Arab world, including some of its nominal "friends" like Jordan and Egypt, to object, claiming that Israel is attempting to permanently occupy Syrian territory.  Of course, it didn't help that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said precisely that was Israel's intent. 

Although Russia has been engaged in a protracted war with Ukraine, designed to keep it bogged down, deplete its military and economy, and (hopefully) weaken Putin's hold on the government, Russia did make a attempt to aid their old comrade, Assad, despite a chorus from the West (led by the U.S. State Department) alleging "interference". Why is it that the U.S. and West can aid allies but nobody else can?

While Assad wasn't necessarily a good guy, at least as far as U.S. interests were concerned, he did provide a stabilizing presence. Much like Saddam Hussein had done in Iraq (even after having his wings clipped following "Operation Desert Storm",  Saddam provided Iraq and the region with political and military stability while keeping the religious extremists in check albeit under his iron fist. Hussein's removal and U.S. failure to have a post-Saddam plan in place, ultimately resulted in a backlash against U.S. occupation and its puppet government, the suppression of the majority Shiite, and radical Islam. 

For those unfamiliar with the political situation in Iraq and why a majority religious group would be held in check, it's because Saddam Hussein was part of the Sunni minority. Saddam ensured that Sunni tribal chieftains and members of his family (including uncles and cousins) were given positions of power while key members of the government and military were also Sunnis.  

The suppressed Shiites were often brutally treated (as were the Kurdish and Christian populations). It's worth mentioning that Saddam had only one Christian as part of his secular administration, Tariq Aziz, who was Deputy prime Minister. Aziz was a member of the Chaldean Catholic Church, a sect of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Kurds and Yazidis had no one in Saddam's government.

Like Hussein, Assad managed to keep religious fanatics  at bay and limit Iran's influence (he also throttled Turkey's expansionist ambitions. However, like the Turks, he was no friend of Kurds and only tolerated the Yazidi as well as the Christians).  Now, that's all changed thanks in large part to neo-con arrogance and a shortsighted U.S. foreign policy. So, what happens next?

As with most events of this sort, there will likely be a prolonged and bloody battle for final control of the country. Syria will, no doubt, end up divided with two dominant players jockeying for position behind the scenes.  The first will of course be the U.S. and its proxy, Israel. The other will be Iran and its puppet terrorists organizations, and behind it Russia and China. The trouble, I think, is that the neo-cons and Iranians are playing two very different and dangerous games.

The U.S. is, as always, thinking in terms of regime change. Its objective is the ultimate control of Iran's ample oil and gas production, and control of the region. China is playing a similar game by buying up rights to resources all over the world. It knows that whoever controls key resources such as fresh water, farmland, and strategic minerals needed for technology, wins. We are banking that the control of oil and gas will ultimately trump China's objectives.

Iran, however, is less interested in who among the non-believers control what. It's outlook is strictly religious. It sees as its sole objective to restore or impose a strict global Islamic Caliphate, to aid in the coming of the 12th Imam (a messiah or prophet of sorts) and the destruction of Israel at any cost, even that of its own survival.

The thing about religious zealotry is that you can only bargain with it in the short term, You can never compromise with it over the long term. Why? Because from its perspective, it is God's sole arbiter on Earth. How can God be negotiated with or bought off? There is only submit or perish.

President Assad's departure will create a void more severe than did Saddam Hussein's by creating a similar strategy as to the neocon's, but in reverse. It's mortal enemy, Iraq, is no longer a threat. The Shiites are now in charge, which is good for Iran. After 20 years of war, Afghanistan remains. The Taliban is still in charge. The "Great Satan"---the United States---has been defeated in their eyes, and our unorganized departure has left them stronger than they were in the beginning.

 Despite the decimation of its leadership, Al Qaida remains , and now it's on the verge of controlling a large swath of Syria. ISIS/ISIL too presents a serious threat.  Iran's proxies are closer to Israel than ever, and therefore Iran's missiles won't require the development and deployment of a long range delivery system. In fact, Al Qaida has already shown that it can easily hit Israel's Galilee area from their positions in northern Syria.

Israel's occupation of the far side of the Golan Heights, which has been demilitarized since the Syrian defeat in the 1973 Yom Kipper War, is understandable from a military security perspective. Additionally, there is some bad blood between many of the rebels now in control of Syria. How that will play out remains a serious question with the very real possibility of a renewed civil war.

It provides a badly needed extra buffer zone, but at what cost? The ire of the Arab world, including its tentative friends? Even its historic allies in the West, principally the EU/NATO and even the U.S., have accused the Israelis of deliberate "genocide" of the Gazians  (although Hamas has done far worse to them, and bear in mind, Hamas started this fight with a massacre of 1200+ Israeli civilians on October 7, 2024).

Now, Turkey, a major power of the EU and NATO, has hinted at intervention if Israel doesn't back off. If that happens, what then? The prime directive of NATO is "an attack on one is an attack on all". Could little ole Israel find itself facing NATO and the Arab world, and if so, what about the United States? It's the linchpin of NATO. Meanwhile, the various factions will duke it out for greater control and old scores will be settled as it always tends to happen in a power vacuum.  This is what's at stake now that Assad's government has fallen and U.S. foreign policy continues to blunder forward with outdated objectives.

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you found our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free thinking individuals. We do ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever site you found us on, and that you please pass our post along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

Who are the rebels in Syria?

Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)

5 things to watch as Syria confronts a new future

Islamic State

Syrian Democratic Forces

US intervention in the Syrian civil war

 

Revolutionary Commando Army

CIA activities in Syria

 

Taming the Golden Dragon: Facing Down China's Growing Military and Economic Influence

While military spending is important to maintaining a strong defense, it's only part of the picture. There are numerous other factors to consider, which brings me to the Lowy Institute Asia Power Index for 2023.

Founded in 2003 by Frank Lowy, the Lowy Institute is a independent Australian think tank. The institute's role is to provide original policy oriented research pertaining to political, economic, and strategic issues from a global perspective with an emphasis on Asia in this case.

The Asia Power Index examines a myriad of factors such as GDP, technological connectivity, resource availability, internal stability and military capabilities in to order to access the overall political clout each of the 26 Asian nations.

For brevity sake, we will focus on a handful of countries with an emphasis on China, Russia, and the United States who are considered the current key global players and some of the key factors affecting the standing. If you'd like to delve into the index more deeply (and we encourage you to do so), we've provided a link below. I'm sure you'll find it as intriguing as we did.

In terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), China was the largest. Alone of the top five, which included the U.S., India, Japan and Russia, its GDP showed signs of sustained growth. It's worth mentioning that sixth placed Indonesia's GDP was growing, making it 9th out of the 26 Asian nations in overall power.

When it came to productivity, the U.S. scored a perfect 100, followed by Australia, Singapore, Japan, New Zealand, and Taiwan. Russia ranked 9th while China was 11th. India, Philippines and Indonesia ranked lower.

The United States was first under the heading of "International Leverage". This can be defined as global clout based on available financial, legal, sanctioning (and enforcement) capabilities.  China was second with its leverage showing sign of growth. Third place Japan, however, saw its influence declining, whereas India, Singapore, South Korea, and Russia all experiencing growth in their global clout.

Technology seems to be the byword for prosperity these days, which was puzzling as each of the top 10 nations associated with technological innovation all showed decline, including top ranked United States, China, and Japan. To find any country whose technology capabilities were growing, we have to drop down to Myanmar in 22nd place on the Index.

However, when it comes to high tech exports, the leading countries were Russia, Brunei, Cambodia, and Indonesia. The United States and China were in fourth and fifth place respectively. 

Under the heading of "Resilience", we come to resource security or the ability to protect and preserve national resources.  In looking at energy self-sufficiency, which would be essential in the event of a global natural disaster or world war, we had some surprising finds.

Each of the top ten countries, starting with Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Laos, and Malaysia, scored 100, as did Russia and the United States.  China was 12th with a energy self-sufficiency  score of 79.6.

Another key factor was fuel security. Not unexpectedly, China, Russia, and the U.S. all scored 100, as did India, South Korea, and Thailand. However, only Brunei and Malaysia showed signs of growth. In terms of net fuel exportation of refined petroleum, China showed growth while Russia, the U.S. as well as India had a decline in their net fuel exportation.  

In today's high tech world, access to rare earth metals are critical. These minerals are used in everything from computer chips and digital cameras to cell phones, batteries (especially like those used in electric cars), flat screen TVs to refining equipment used in processing oil and gas.  

Ranked first, China was the only country with a score of 100. Second was the United States with a score  25.6, though production of rare earth minerals by tonnage was declining. It's worth noting that the U.S. imports 78% of it rare earth metals from China. In addition, China has roughly 90% of all known rare earth minerals in ground.  Fourth was Australia which has been increasing its share of mined rare earth metals. 6th ranked India and 7th ranked Russia were both reducing their percentages of tons mined.  

Perhaps one of the most overlooked but critical factors is that of internal security.  The U.S. was ranked 8th among the 26 Asian nation with its internal stability in decline, which isn't surprising. For five straight years the Economic Intelligence Unit's "Democracy Index" has rated the U.S. as a "flawed democracy" and ranked us 26th out of 167 countries, putting us between Chile and Estonia.  Other studies have shown the United States as no longer a Republic, but a Corportracy and an Oligarchy.

China was ranked tenth in over internal security, but also declining. This likely due to the rising tensions in China's Xinjiang Province among its Muslim population which makes up about 2% of China's total population. In addition, there has been a surge in China's Pro-democracy movement, principally around Hong Kong, and opposition to one party rule.

15th ranked Russia also faces declining internal stability. This appears due to several factors such as frustration with Putin's control over the country, a decline in democratic freedoms, the ongoing war with Ukraine and  its effect on the Russian economy, and rising militancy among its Muslim population.

Another related factor is political stability. Singapore and New Zealand are considered the most politically stable of the 26 Asian nations with scores of 98.5 and 98.0 respectively. Nevertheless, the United States was ranked 11th with a score of just 44.8. While the Index showed increasing stability, this may be a bit deceiving.

The two primary political parties have become dominated by corporate special interests and there has been less diversity of opinion from mainstream news sources, resulting in a drop in trust according to the major polling services.  Meanwhile, voters have been abandoning both parties enmasse, resulting in a 49% majority of voters registering as Independent.  

China, ranked 16th, too is showing as what passes for "political stability" as the CCP has exerted tighter control over the government amid the growing tensions with the United States and the West, and rising internal troubles. The same can be said for 20th placed Russia and Putin's tightening grip given the war with Ukraine and frosting of relations with the West, and particularly the United States.   

America was alone among all developed industrial nations in continuing seeing a rise in infant mortality along with a decline in life expectancy and general quality of life. In 2020, it ranked 50th of 147 countries. The U.S. ranks 47th in life expectancy, putting it between Albania and Estonia.

As an aside, it's worth noting the United States ranks last among the seven largest high income economies in terms of healthcare. The metrics used include quality of overall care, number of and access to hospital beds, quality of life, access to care, and efficiency despite having the most expensive healthcare system of any country. So who's the best? Norway, followed by the Netherlands, Australia, the U.K., and Germany.

Now we turn to the military.  In terms of sheer manpower, with 2.8 million men and women in uniform and another 500,000 reservists, China should be the largest military in world. However, according to the Index, India has taken over that honor with just over 3 million active duty military personnel. The Index also shows that China has decreased the number of active duty military while India's has increased.

China has, however, been on a building spree to increase the size of its navy which includes aircraft carriers--- one operational, one nearing completion, and another on the drawing board. It has increased the number of its cruisers, destroyers, and landing craft of various sides. It's chief problem at this time is a lack of trained carrier based pilots and that takes time. Russia was ranked fourth with roughly 1.4 million in uniform. The U.S. ranked 5th with 1,495,000 men and women serving in the armed forces.

In a related area, the Index still gives the U.S. the nod when it comes to long range naval force projection, though its ability has declined in recent years. China has been quickly rising from its number two ranking position and may overtake the U.S. in the Pacific within the next few years. However, for now, the U.S. remains first in naval deployment capabilities.

Both Russia and the U.S. have seen a decrease in the effective of their respective militaries. In the case of Russia, it's been the reduction in overall preparedness since the fall of the Soviet Russia in 1991. When it came to rapid deployment, China was ranked first thanks to a new emphasis on its naval development. Russia was a close second. The U.S. was fourth and trending down.

In America's case, this is due largely to the 20 year misadventure in Iraq and Afghanistan which has left the military understaffed and in need to a complete overhaul of nearly everything. Several defense report suggest that the only branch now capable of a full engagement was the Marines.

Other reports point out that the U.S. military, while able to quickly put boots on the ground anywhere in the world, would not be capable of sustaining a two front war as it was in the past. Still, U.S. troops remain the best trained and equipped of any in the world. The Index ranked the U.S. first followed by Russia and Australia.

The Index gave the U.S. a rating of 100 when it came to military platforms, though it acknowledged American military decline. Meanwhile, at  number two, China military capabilities are increasing, especially its naval power as mentioned above. Russia and India remained ranked third and fourth.

As an aside, China was ranked first in ground based missile launchers while the U.S. was out in front when it came to "boomers" or ballistic missile submarines. In terms of area deniability, which covers intelligence gathering (including recon and monitoring), air firepower, and naval capabilities, the U.S. remained first although those capabilities have dropped while second ranked Russia and third placed China saw their capabilities increase. 

When it came to airpower, the U.S. remained ranked first, however, China, India, and Russia were expanding their abilities to contest the battle from above. Meanwhile, Russia and China were expanding their drone and AWACS presence as the U.S. has been forced to cut back due to retirement, aircraft overhauls (along with facing shortages of spare parts and adequately trained personnel), and updates. All three superpowers face a reduction in cyber capabilities as well according to the Index.

Lastly were the nukes. The country with the most nuclear weapons was by far Russia. It's currently estimated that Russia has 5,977 nuclear warheads, mostly mounted on ground based mobile units. The United States has roughly 5,428 nukes spread throughout it naval, air, and land based forces. The Chinese have about 350 nuclear warheads.

So, where does this leave us? Based on the Index, the United States remains number one overall among the 26 Asian nations examined. However, while the U.S. remains strong in key areas, it's apparent that its overall capabilities, while still strong, are showing indication of decline. America remains vulnerable in key areas such as strategic or rare earth metals and outdated shipping facilities. It should be pointed that America's communication grid continues to be vulnerable to cyber or terrorist attack.

Finally, the U.S. military is badly worn down thanks to a badly conceived invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and an equally worse withdrawal. The final result was a defacto military defeat which left the Taliban and ISIS back in charge and in possession of billions in U.S. military equipment.

The military is in critical need of a total overhaul or replacement of everything from tanks to aircraft to ships to leadership while the country needs a clearly defined foreign policy base on new realities, not those of a Cold War that ended over two decades ago. Since the end of the war, the military is facing a serious shortages of qualified personnel as thousands grab their DD214's and get out.

America's healthcare system, which is vital in the event of a major war, natural disaster or another scare like that of COVID, is woefully inadequate. The political system of the U.S. is deeply fractured, which has greatly increased its internal stability, leading many to project "when", not "if" as revolution or civil war isn't far off. The stability of the U.S. financial system is shaky at best, forcing deepening cut backs in public services, which only worsens the economic and social divide.

Meanwhile, China has double down on its economic and military growth despite warning signs of overheating or even collapse. It has been busy buying up resources and making inroads throughout the world, especially in Africa and Latin America, as well as among America's enemies (most notably Iran). China controls many of the natural resources the U.S. needs to remain competitive globally. It also dominates American trade imports so much so that sanctions, an embargo or war with China would cripple the economy.

There's no question the winds of global power have shifted east. It growth in naval power will ensure its power projection throughout the Pacific. The Yuan is posed to replaced the dollar as the "go to" currency for international trade. It's developing economic and military power has many Asian leaders contemplating whether their best interests lay with Beijing rather than Washington.

Russia too is on the rise. Although Moscow has always tried to look westward to a future with Europe, the current war in Ukraine, brought on by an aggressive U.S. backed NATO, which has included economic sanctions, has forced Russia to turn again eastward where the bulk of its landmass and resources lay. The warming of the climate will allow Russia access to trillions in natural resources.

The cross-nation BRICS economic alliance, consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, has allowed emerging growth nations the ability to bypass the Machiavellian policies of the West (and U.S. led sanctions), and create an essentially post-America future.

As Bob Dylan sang back in 1960's while the Cold War raged, "times are a-changing" . Indeed they have, and it appears the winds of change are getting stronger. Perhaps it's time we pull our collars up and dig our hands a little deeper into our pockets. It seems the eastward blowing winds are getting colder too.

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

           

The Lowy Institute Asian Power Index 2023

PH 51st on the lists of world's most powerful militaries

U.S. remains a 'flawed democracy' in annual rankings

World Data: Life Expectancy

AJMC: U.S. Has Highest Infant Maternal Mortality RatesDespite the Most Healthcare Spending

Mirror Mirror 2021: Reflecting Poorly

JAMA: US Health System Ranks Last Among High-IncomeCountries

US defense industry isn't prepared for a war with China, report says

 

Reading America's Fortune Cookie: Is War with China Likely?

Let's face it. The war in Ukraine isn't going well for anyone. Putin's military advisors anticipated a brief invasion followed by a ceasefire and talks about how to guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty without a NATO presence on Ukrainian soil and protecting Russian national security. But that didn't happen.

Instead, the U.S. and its European surrogate, NATO, immediately began pumping billions of dollars in weapons into Ukraine, not to mention providing intelligence about Russian troop movement. The Western media went into full propaganda mode to condemn not just the invasion (rightly so), but also to spin U.S. and NATO involvement and the reasons for the invasion in the first place.

The result has been a stalemate measured in dead civilians, massive destruction of towns and cities and the growing specter of nuclear war. Without U.S. and NATO involvement, the invasion would likely have been over with a few months at best with a practical compromise the likely result. But then again, had Russia not been forced to invade to protect its national security from an encirclement of NATO missiles on its western front, there would have been to need for anyone's involvement and nobody would be dead.  

The only nation to present a peace proposal thus far has been China, which the United States and its allies dismissed out of hand. The primary reason is that China is a ally of Russia, and besides, it has recently started providing military support to Russian troops operating in Ukraine.  You would think that after a year of war, the United Nations or someone would have stepped forward to offer a solution to stop the war, but apparently not. Why?

The most likely reason is pressure from Washington. Washington has long seen Russia a potential threat to its military and economic primacy, well, that is until the collapse of the USSR in 1989 and implosion of Soviet Russia in 1991.  Since then, the United States has sought to impose a "Pax Americana" and the global integration of economies under the auspices of a U.S. led "New World Order".  However, not everyone wants to play along.

Russia, along a few other countries such as Cuba, Brazil, Iran, and China, have been able to go about their merry way outside of this American hegemony. A few have formed their own economic solution, such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China, which formed "BRIC" in 2009. Subsequently, the name has been changed to "BRICS" with the addition of South Africa in 2010. 

There have been other economic blocs formed outside the sphere of American influence such as "The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership" (RCEP), which was signed into being in 2020 and took effect in 2022. RCEP is now the largest economic partnership in the world.

At its head is China, and it includes Vietnam, Australia, Brunei, Japan, Cambodia, Laos, Singapore, New Zealand, and Thailand. It doesn't not include the United States. RCEP accounts for some 30% of the world's economy, 30% of the world's population, and will have an economic reach of at least 2.2 billion potential customers.  

China has established itself not just as the world's second largest economy with a GDP of $17.73 billion dollars(compared to the U.S. with a GDP of $23.32 billion), but is expected to surpass the U.S. by 2035. By 2075 or sooner, India will also pass the U.S., leaving the U.S. as the third largest global economy.

China seeks to do more than just wrestle economic control of the Pacific Rim from the United States. It intends to back up with military might, with a particular focus on its navy.  The Chinese have embarked on the largest military upgrade of any nation since WWII although the United States still spends more on its military budget than the next nine nations combined including China.

In 2022, China spent roughly $293 billion dollars, or 13.9% of its GDP upgrading its military while the United States spent $801 billion dollars or 37.9% of the GDP on its military. Together, China and the U.S. make up 50% of all military expenditures with a combined $1.1 trillion dollars. 

By comparison, Russia spent just 3.1% of its GDP, or $65.9 billion on its military. The UK spent slightly more, or about $68.4 billion dollars. It's worth nothing that China's military expenditures have increased 27 years in a row. The result is that China now has the newest and largest navy in the world by tonnage.

Meanwhile, the U.S. military is still the best trained and equipped, it's suffering from combat fatigue. After 20 years in Afghanistan, the United States left with virtually nothing to show for it. Yes, it took out Al Qaeda's top leadership including Osama bin Laden, but Al Qaeda barely skipped a beat, replacing leaders almost immediately and continuing with its operations. The same goes for the Taliban. In fact, the Taliban were already back in charge before the last U.S. military planes had left Kabul.  

To make matters worse, following the withdrawal, the U.S. military saw a rapid exodus of its highly skilled men and women (most of whom having served at least four tours of combat duty) with replacement proving to be slow and time consuming. In addition, the military is woefully in need of a total overhaul or replacement of practically everything from ships to tanks to aircraft.

During the course of the war, the United States flew 55,150 sorties and dropped over 337,000 bombs and missiles (including some 13,000 precision guided munitions) in Afghanistan. That works out to be an average of about 49 bombs per day every day. In 2019 alone, a record number of 7,423 bombs were dropped on Afghanistan.  The result was a severe shortage in our stockpile of practically everything from bombs to bullets, not to mention spare parts particularly for aircraft.

As an aside, while we were busy blowing up Afghanistan, we were also busy rebuilding it back in our image. U.S. taxpayers shelled out $145,000 billion dollars over the 20 years in rebuilding its infrastructure, schools, hospitals and office buildings, its electrical grid as well as training and equipping its security forces, stabilizing its government, and propping up its economy...and the Taliban got it all, not to mention billions in military equipment and hardware we left behind.

Starting between now and 2035, the U.S. military is expected to undergo a major overhauls of its ships (combat and auxiliary), aircraft, tanks, trucks, artillery, and so forth. If it moves or shoots, it's getting a makeover.  Some ships, however, are beyond the makeover phase. The Pentagon confirmed in late 2022 that 26 ships will be decommissioned, leaving the Navy shorthanded with just 276 active ships (300 is considered its minimal effective force)

However, over the next ten years the Navy is expected to be back up to its fighting weight with the addition of eight new "deep water" combat ships and a projected fleet of 500 ships by 2040; most of whom are destined for the Pacific (by comparison, the British Royal Navy, once the world's dominate naval power, has just 76 combat ships while Australia has a mere 44).

The problem is that China is already at or near its fighting weight. China currently has 355 combat ready ships, including two aircraft carriers and a third, the Fujian, preparing for sea trials. Analysts predict that by 2030, China will have five aircraft carriers and ten new submarines capable of carrying nuclear ballistic missiles. However, China still lacks adequately trained carrier based pilots. Nevertheless,  projections show that if China continues to build its fleet at the same rate it has over the past 27 years, it will have a whooping 425 warships by 2030.

China is also increasing the number of missile carrying destroyers, cruisers and landing craft as well.  China's new Type 075 amphibious assault landing ship will come in at 40,000 metric tons with the capability of carrying 30 helicopters along with landing craft and just over 1000 assault troops.  The Type 075 replaces the Type 071 by 15,000 tons. There are now 32 Type 075's combat ready.

The Type 071 is another, albeit slightly smaller, amphibious land ship. Displacing 20,000 metric tons, it has capacity to carry four helicopters and roughly 800 combat troops. There are currently six known Type 071 ships in service at this time.

In addition to its combat fleet, China has greatly expanded its merchant fleet as well. Something you would expect with a growing economy. China now has 40.3% of the world's merchant shipbuilding market. Compare that to South Korea and Japan which has a 31.5% and a 22.2% share respectively.

China now has the second largest fleet of ships with 5,600, of which approximately 800 merchant ships. Greece has the largest, with 20.4% of the world's tonnage while China has 14.4% and Japan is third with 13% of the world's tonnage. China also has completed or updated the number of ship building facilities to six.

So, bringing this all together, what does it mean for the United States? The United States is still capable of projecting its military might around the world on a moment's notice. However, the question is whether it is still capable of maintaining that projection against a determined foe like Russia or China.

According to a report by the Heritage Foundation entitled "Index of U.S. Military Strength", only the Marines were rated at "strong" while the Navy and Space Force were categorized as "weak". The Air Force was rated as "very weak" and the Army was "marginal".  

Our stockpile of munitions and spare parts were badly depleted by our 20 year misadventure in Afghanistan, and much of what we were able to build back has found its way to Kyiv. The U.S. Navy, our principal tool in the projection of our foreign policy, is currently undergoing a phased overhaul and updating which isn't expected to be completed before 2035. The other branches are also undergoing their own updating which will take several years to complete.

Meanwhile, China is already at or near its ideal fighting weight, with the development of many of its ships progressing ahead of schedule. China's economy, while slowed, is still doing well while ours remains sluggish thanks to rising inflation and lingering effects of COVID on the economy.  Meanwhile, China has become much more aggressive.

It has claimed both the East and South China Seas as its own, and warned other nations to stay away. It has declared some of the territorial waters around South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia, and India are in fact international waters, and thus has asserted its fishing rights there. China is also involved in a "warm war" with India along its mutual border in the Himalayas.

The creation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) may have a severe impact of America's ability to protect its interests in the Pacific, especially in light of China's growing economy, its expanded merchant fleet, along with a modernized navy capable and apparently ready to defend its economic interests.

For allies like Taiwan, the future doesn't look bright. Over the next seven to ten years, Taiwan will be particularly vulnerable. China has the means and ability to block off the South and East China Seas, and from there launch as rapid air and sea invasion of the island nation before the United States or anyone else has an opportunity to do anything.

This is especially true given our current preoccupation with Ukraine (and doubly so should we make the mistake up upping the ante and forcing Putin into some direct action against NATO. To make matters more interesting, China's ally, North Korea, could start something with South Korea which would further divert the attention a weakened U.S. military (some military analysts have states that given our current situation, we are unlikely to be able to operate effectively on two fronts). 

Of course, there's the economic angle. The U.S. is heavily dependent on Chinese imports, especially on electronics and computer chips. We depend on China for textiles, batteries, and machinery needed  in industry and even the military such as Neodymium which powers magnets used in hard drives or Praseodymium in the manufacture of aircraft engines which are "rare earth" metals.  

The U.S. doesn't manufacture these and other rare earth metals in abundance, but China does. In fact, they control 90% of the world's rare earth market. Heck, most of our cell phones---72%---are made in China!

 90% of our antibiotics come from China. 80% of the ingredients used in our medicines come from China. They also control 90% of the nine critical vitamins, 70% of acetaminophen, and 50% of the anti-coagulant Heparin.  Most of the medical devises we commonly use are of Chinese origin. 

Where does that leave us? The short answer is between a rock and a hard place. Internally we are increasingly unstable socially, economically, and politically. We can no longer afford to be arrogant about the supposed superiority of American capitalism or invincible military might as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have shown.

We can't forget that China also owns about 20% or $1 billion dollars of our debt. They can call the tune economically with their influence on our domestic market, and even their growing economy and military power, they are likely to exert de facto regional control over the Pacific Rim and eventually they may surpass us as the world's most power nation. From all appearances, China has outfoxed the fox.    

 

 If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Asia forms world's biggest trade bloc, a China-backed group excluding U.S.

Ranked: Top Ten Countries by Military Spending

 

How is China Modernizing its Navy?

 

China's Navy Could Have 5 Aircraft Carriers, 10 ballistic Missile Submarines by 2030 Say CSBA Report

US military in decline, threats from China "formable" , report says

 

Executive Summary of the 2023 Index of U.S. MilitaryStrength

 

U.S. Dependent on China forVital Ingredients

We're Too Dependent on China For Too Many Critical Goods, Especially Medicine

Preparing for War with China, 2025-2032

What Will Drive China to War?

U.S. General's Prediction of War with China 'in 2025' Risks Turning Worse Fears Into Reality

 

The War in Afghanistan: Who Benefited? Who Didn't?

Here's something you likely won't hear from the corporate media. Although we spent 20 years in Afghanistan, we left it largely the same way we found it---backwards, corrupt, and in the hands of the Taliban. So, who benefited and who didn't?

We were told that the ones responsible for 9/11 were in Afghanistan, and the Taliban run government was aiding and abiding them. Well, that was true...to a point. U.S. and Western intelligence identified Osama bin Laden as the mastermind, which was likely. This son of a wealthy and well connected Saudi family had previously "declared war" on the United States, although no one seemed to notice or care.

Al Qaeda launched several attacks on U.S. and Western targets, mostly in Africa and low security targets in Europe such as a disco in Berlin which was frequented by American servicemen and women. When that failed to adequately get our attention, he changed tactics. This time he focused on a high profile target in the United States---the Twin Towers

Bin Laden recruited 15 fellow Saudis, 2 from the UAR, and one each from Lebanon and Egypt for the mission, and sent them off into the belly of "the Great Satan" where our overconfidence became their best weapon. It's also where 2,996 innocent people going about their daily business people died. In their place, a blind and deaf patriotism was born along with about a dozen conspiracy theories (by the way, that just because it's called a "conspiracy theory" doesn't mean it isn't true).

Saved from a failing presidency, George "Dubya" Bush went from an approval rating low somewhere in the subterranean sewers of Washington DC to calls for another face to be added to Mt. Rushmore. In all the vengeful anger and patriotic fever of the moment, we allowed the so-called "Patriot Act" to take hold; a document about as "patriotic" as the Enabling Act of 1933 following the Reichstag Fire (and just as spontaneous too).

Over the next 20 years the United States and its aid dependent allies delivered Hell from above and below. An estimated 243,000 Afghani and Pakistanis died as death was delivered with UPS efficiency from above and below. 70,000 men, women and children died as a direct result. The bad guys lost at least 53,000, but that's only a guess. Apparently "holy warriors" don't keep statistics, or at least make them public.

On the other side, U.S. and coalition forces lost at least 70,600 with about 22,773 wounded. 2,356 of these were America's future. God only knows how many bear scars you can't see.  Of the 70,600 total, 65,596 were part of the Afghan Security Forces, with an additional 16,500 wounded.

By comparisons, Russia lost over 15,000 of its sons and daughters during the course of its 10 year war in Afghanistan with thousands more wounded. Russian military personnel managed to kill an estimated 90,000 Mujahedeen fighters which were heavily supported by the U.S., (it's said this was partly in revenge for Soviet support of the NVA and Viet Cong during the Vietnam War. Knowing the NeoCons, it probably was).

At the same time, over one million Afghan civilians were killed, not including those killed in the subsequent civil war which followed the Soviet withdrawal in 1989 though the takeover by the Taliban in 1996.

Not to be outdone by the Western "crusaders", the Taliban is believed to have destroyed approximately $500 million dollars worth if infrastructure affecting 13 million people in 116 districts. It left 92% of population "food insecure" and some 3 million children facing severe malnutrition. Take that infidels! 

Just since our withdrawal in May 2021, some 400+ has been murdered by the Taliban (is it still "murder" if the Taliban claims it was acting on orders from God? Guess to the dead or their families it doesn't really matter does it?). Of course, there's always the billions in U.S. military equipment left behind which suddenly made the Taliban the fifth largest military in the world. Who should the Taliban thank for that little "gift"?

Ironically, despite the majority of Americans demanding an end to war in Afghanistan (54%) by 2021, nearly half---46%--- now believe the takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban's new and improved "We-Say-So" government represents a threat to U.S. national security.  Ah the fickle masses!

Meanwhile, women are being regulated back to their pre-infidel invasion third class status as school for women and girls is cancelled and women are fired from their jobs. Those who own businesses face closure. Those who speak out risk public beatings, acid thrown in their faces, or stoning to death. If only the Taliban could reach the same level of  Iran's enlightenment (sarcasm intended).

What about the American People? Aside for the deaths and injuries whose cost are beyond measure, most don't realize that our 20 year long fiasco in Afghanistan and Iraq was paid for solely on credit. Can you guess who is picking up the tab? 

Best estimates put the damage to U.S. taxpayers at around $2.2 trillion dollars (or $300 million per day). With interest, some estimates put the cost at $6.2 trillion dollars by 2050 (good luck with that Millennials and Gen Z). You might be interested to know that during the Korean War, President Harry Truman temporarily raised the top end tax rate on the rich to 92%. During Vietnam, Lyndon Johnson raised it to 77%. So what did ole "Dubya" do? President George Bush lowered the tax rate on America's richest to 8%.

So, who benefited from the 20 years we spent in Afghanistan? Well, it's hard to say. The Afghani people certainly didn't. They suffered mightily under the Soviet invasion and its nine year occupation. They suffered under the Taliban's occupation.

America's invasion and occupation was almost as bad, except there was a measure of gender equality while we were there.  Women and girls could go to school. They could work, own property, and do other things females get to do in the modern world; you know, like they were ordinary people and stuff

In addition, women and other Afghanis could also freely vote, although the Taliban and other Islamic extremists did their best to try and prevent it. Nevertheless, there was a measure of democratic freedom which is rare in the Middle East.  Unfortunately after we left (or rather, as we left), democracy came to quick end and the 10th Century returned in all its ugliness as the Taliban picked up where it left off.

The American People didn't really benefit. Sure, we were given a target to vent our anger on following the cowardly attacks of 9/11. But along the way, we were betrayed by some of our regional "allies" (I'm talking about Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency and its Prime Minister, Imran Khan) and various tribal chiefs (most had to be bribed to show any measure of loyalty).

We could have had bin Laden and many more of his key commanders much sooner had those in Imran Khan's government not help finance, arm, train, hide, and provide intelligence to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, which would have saved a lot of innocent lives on all sides. It's a shame how some individuals put their greed for personal power and wealth before the wellbeing of their own people. But, at the same time it exposes their moral weakness for all the world to see.

While extracting our revenge, we failed to notice the underhandedness happening here at home. Sure, we came together as a people. We closed ranks. We hung out flags.We cheered at the playing of our national anthem. Patriotism was back in vogue again. We hadn't been this united since December 8, 1941, the day after another cowardly attack which caught us with our pants down and our cockiness up.

Perhaps it was this unity which concerned certain individuals and groups. After all, a united America was something they didn't want. They had spent lots of time, effort, and money to keep Americans divided. After all, divided, frustrated, and confused was how to control us. United and we were suddenly dangerous. United and we just might focus our manufactured anger away from each other and on those who sought to destroy our Republic and turn it into a neo-fascist corporatocracy.

So, without even completely reading it, a document that had been drafted primarily by corporate lobbyists was rushed through Congress and passed. It was given a euphemistically optimistic sounding name of "the Patriot Act" as if questioning what it was or what was in it was somehow unpatriotic.  A few lone voices in the political wilderness tried to warn us but were quickly silenced. The surveillance state was born.

The "Patriot Act" effectively declared a never-ending war based on a loosely defined term--- "terrorism" where rights for individuals cease to exist under the pretext of national security. Gone too were all the usual checks and balances we've come to expect such as accountability, limits on search and seizure or judicial oversight.

The enemy was now whoever the State said it was. Those arrested under "FISA" can essentially disappear. Under "FISA" you have the right to absolutely nothing whatsoever. It combined all the elements of McCarthyism's "Red Scare" with aspects of the KGB's early morning knocks on the doors and George Orwell's dystopian novel "1984". 

Obviously, the American People didn't benefit, so again, who did?  Wall Street benefited. The Pentagon spent $14 trillion dollars, with roughly half that going to defense contractors (according to one report, since 2001, payments made to defense contractors have risen 164%). The majority of money spent went to just five corporations---Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Northrop-Grumman, and Boeing, but other companies such as General Electric and Halburton made out alright too.  

Thanks to our new "surveillance state", spy agencies saw their budgets balloon, particularly the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the National Security Agency (NSA), as well as the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Reconnaissance Agency (NRC), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), along with the various intelligence arms of the various U.S. military branches. Naturally, off the book budgets, the so-called "black budgets", likely were increased. Much of this was used to fund various covert research/development and operations carried out by "independent" contractors. 

Meanwhile, Congress and other government officials benefited. Defense contractors reportedly spent over $2.5 billion dollars over the past 20 years and employed over 700 lobbyists. On average, members of Congress had three lobbyists each just from Defense industry. We the People had none. This is the "free speech" Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) talks about when defending Citizens United.

So, if you want to know who benefited from our 20 year venture in Afghanistan and Iraq, now you know. It wasn't the Afghani People or the American People. The ones who benefited from the war which claimed tens of thousands killed or wounded, and billions of dollars in destruction were defense contractors and their de facto "employees" in Congress. This is just one relatively small example of the power and control Wall Street has over government. 

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Timeline: Major attacks by al Qaeda

Hijackers in the September 11 attacks

Taliban Destroyed, Damaged Infrastructure in 116 Districts:IARCS

A year later, a look back at public opinion about the U.S.military exit from Afghanistan

The cost of the Afghanistan war, in lives and dollars

CFR: Pakistan's Support For the Taliban: What To Know

ACLU: Surveillance under the USA/Patriot Act

Watson Institute: Costs of War

 

2021: A Year in Retrospective and a Look Forward

 I think most of us hoped for the best but expected the worse for 2021. We weren't disappointed. Starting the year with the continuing Covid Crisis, a looming withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, an aggressive China, and a highly contested presidential election, 2021 was one for the history books.  

January 6th Protest: Trumping Justice?

2021 came in with a roar and we're still hearing its echo. It began as a protest in Washington on January 6th over the contested results of the presidential election. It devolved into an all out protest over a broken political system. Protestors stormed Capitol Hill, flags in hand, and entered the House and Senate Chambers where, as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said with her usual sarcastic seriousness, the "People's business" was conducted. If by "people" she meant corporations, she was right.

Windows were broken, laptops and other "mementos" were stolen as legislators fled rather than face the angry voters they were supposed to represent. Many officials hide under their desk behind lock doors to wait things out. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claimed to have been there and terrified by what might happen next when in reality she was over a block away and in no danger.

Immediately members of the House and Senate blamed President Trump, who was as surprised by the magnitude of the protests as anyone, but bedeviled by his ill-advised texts of support for the protest. By the time it was all over, one unarmed protester, 35 year old Ashli Babbit, lay dead on the Speaker's lobby floor, having been shot and killed by a Washington police officer.  Four others died of natural causes. Two were heart attacks, one was an overdose, while the other, a police officer, had a stroke.

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, deeply spiteful toward Trump and his supporters, has tried every way possible to impeach Trump a second time and bar him from ever holding office again. The Department of Justice has sought out anyone involved with the protest (which the corporate media terms as a "riot" and "insurrection" as opposed to Antifa's and BLM's "peaceful" looting, vandalism of public and private property, random assaults, and arson of the previous Summer).

Thus far, 727 protestors have been charged by the DOJ. 50 have been tried, convicted, and sentenced (one person, who stole a beer from Pelosi's office, got 20 days. Good thing he left the bourbon alone!).  Most of the 50 arrested were charged with misdemeanor crimes. Of those, 19 received jail time. Four were charged with felonies and sentenced from 8 months to 3 1/2 years in prison.

Democrats and Leftist activists are demanding lengthier sentences while those on the Right are outraged at any sentencing (especially in lieu of the Antifa and BLM protests and violent riots over the summer and faced little or no legal repercussions), calling the convicted "political prisoners".  

Meanwhile, at year's end, the DOJ and other federal agencies are still conducting investigations into whether President Trump or anyone in his administration were involved or had any prior knowledge of the protests. It's seems that the Democrats (and a few Republicans) are determined to insure that Trump doesn't ever run again for any office. Establishment Republicans want to be rid of any and all Trump supporters.

The protests of January 6th was an explosion of emotion by the Right who've, up to that point, had largely held back their anger and frustration at what they saw a stolen election by the Democrats and the further destruction of America; egged on by the media. It's an example of not just how divided we've become, but also how the Right wasn't going to set back and take it any longer.  

Biden's Year One

The protests of January 6th and its aftermath marked the beginning of Biden's Administration. Perhaps too, it should be seen as a warning of the depth of our divide and anger. The Biden Administration started off by quickly overturning many of Trump's policies, especially regarding illegal immigration along our southern border. One of his first order of business was stopping the construction of the border wall and removing what had already been erected. 

Meanwhile, the Biden administration reportedly had indicated the families "separated" under Trump's "Zero Tolerance" policy were to received $425,000 each according to a Wall Street Journal story. According to the story, the ACLU had filed a lawsuit on behalf of the families affected despite the fact that the actions of the immigrants being in violation of section 212 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act and section 275(a) making it a crime to enter the country illegally. The lawsuit would be like a burglar suing a homeowner for injuring them self while robbing their house. 

However, in a November 3rd press conference, Biden angrily denied there would be any payments when asked by a reporter. The executive director of the ACLU, Anthony Romero, quickly refuted Biden's statement and suggested that Biden might want to discuss the matter with his Justice Department regarding the settlement negotiations, which apparently Biden is unaware of. Meanwhile, the crisis on the southern border keeps growing as illegal immigrants pile up.

COVID and the Continuing Pandemic

By the end of 2020, most Americans had begun to breathe a sigh of relief...without the masks. After being assured of a short 14 day shutdown which turned in a nearly yearlong quarantine, shortages, and constant "doomsday" reporting by governors, the CDC, Dr. Fauci, and the media, Americans had reached a breaking point when, out of the blue, three vaccines appeared...just like magic.

Again, Americans were assured that the vaccines; these magical elixirs would save the day. All we had to do now was "take the jab", and many did. However, several things happened. First, we were told we could still get the virus, except the symptoms wouldn't be as bad (but people could still died). Second, we should continue wearing our masks, use sanitizers, and take all of the previous precautions. Third, we were to continue to "social distance" just like the previous (election) year. Just saying.

Then the other shoe dropped. Reports started emerging from highly reputable doctors, professional medical associations, and others that the vaccines, which were produced, approved, and released within four months (a process which normally can take years or decades) weren't a safe as promoted. Then we started hearing from those who "got the jab" and about their reactions to the vaccine, including development of other health issues, some of which were serious or potentially deadly.

The CDC, Biden Administration, and media immediately jumped in to delete the reports, discredit the doctors and testimonials, while social media overtly started censoring any content contrary to the Status Quo. As an aside, social media platforms had previously been censoring, labeling, or removing any content which it regarded as not in compliance with its "community guidelines" (ie: conservative).

A large segment of Americans, mostly conservative or independent, began opting out of the "jab", along with wearing a mask or social distancing. They also refused to censor their speech. This resulted in Biden issuing a "mandate" telling Americans to comply. Never a good idea. This "mandate" also directed all government employees and "encouraged" all businesses to require workers to get the jab and provide proof; reminiscent of the Nazi Era "Kennkarte" or identification cards. An even worse idea.

As the mandate took effect, companies quickly found themselves in serious trouble. No employees. This mushroomed into unstocked shelves .Trucks and ships not being unloaded. No one to operate checkout counters, take orders at restaurants, or staff offices. With shortages came higher demand for products, resulting in higher prices; inflation has now raised its ugly head, thus creating a new economic crisis on top of the 2020 quarantine which forced many small businesses to close for good.

War and Rumors of War

Another hallmark of 2020 was the "withdrawal" of U.S. and Allied forces from Afghanistan. President Trump had intended a slow withdrawal of troops while continuing to work with Afghan forces based on the advice of his generals. Biden, however, opted for a immediate and full pullout, leaving a unstable government under President Karzai in a precarious situation.

The Afghan Army and security forces was never that good. While its equipment (mainly American and British) were superb, it's training adequate, it's dedication and willingness to fight was pathetic. It reminded many of the South Vietnamese Army in the 70's as America withdrew from that war. 

Many called Biden's decision "ill advised" or "dangerous", which proved to be right. Within 30 days of U.S. exodus, Karzai and his regime were gone (along with billions of dollars). The Taliban was back in charge and now in possession of state of the art American and British equipment. Al Qaeda, the reason for our invasion in the first place, was back in business along with ISIS.  Our 20 year war was a failure. Thousands of Afghans, many unvetted, were evacuated mainly to Europe and the U.S.. Let's hope no terrorists were among them. Meanwhile, Biden was the Taliban's new "Man of the Year".

As if that wasn't enough, China has been flexing its economic and political muscle. The pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong vanished under the cloud of Covid; Taiwan has been increasingly threaten, as China has invaded the territorial fishing waters of its neighbors and staking claim over the South. China Sea while skirmishing with India over the disputed Sino-Indian border region known as "South Tibet".

Given America's perceived weakness by China and other nations, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, India, and Australia  have begun to work together as a buffer against Chinese expansion and to safeguard Taiwan's sovereignty.  China has already issued stern warnings that any interference would result in serious consequences. Is that muscle or mouth? We may soon find out.

Meanwhile, Biden claims that according to his intelligence reports, Russia is preparing to invade the Ukraine, a claim which President Putin strongly denies. The Ukraine has petitioned to join NATO, which would allow NATO missiles, troops, and other military hardware to be stationed directly on Russia's border. Other former Warsaw Pact nations have joined NATO. Thus, a threatened Putin has stated that while no invasion is intended, NATO missiles and military in the Ukraine would not be tolerated.

Who's In Charge of This Circus?

Lastly, there's the matter of Biden's health. Ever since the presidential debates, there's been questions concerning Biden's health. He's already had two surgeries for brain aneurysms and appears to have memory trouble. He's shown repeated odd behavior, like getting lost, unable to properly read speeches on teleprompters, understand issues or questions, even with ear piece he tries to conceal.  

His latest physical (first since becoming president) was good for someone 79 years old, at least that's what we were told. However, a lot of people, both in and out of politics seriously question his ability to hold office. Foreign leaders seem to agree, and see America as weak and potentially vulnerable. His approval rating is in the low 30's, which is one of the worse of any president, while his Vice President, Kamala Harris, has the lowest approval ratings ever for a VP with 28%. 

All of this raises the question, who is actually in charge, and what does it mean for America? We all know America is in the decline as a world power. The ruling Oligarchy and the media has sought to divided us up ever way from Sunday. It makes us easier to control and manipulate, but as the "anti-vaxxers" and the January 6th protestors have shown, their grip is slipping.  Even those on the Left outside of the Establishment, know something is wrong. We feel it our souls. This is not our America.

As we've learned over the past several presidencies, neither intelligence, experience, or even character are essential to be president. It seems that only the right connections (especially money), and the ability to look good, sound good, and have some a medicorum of charisma are required. Everything else can be faked or manufactured. Of course, the one ironclad quality is to maintain the Status Quo, no matter what you tell or promise the people. The empire must be maintained.

Getting Out Alive: We're All Americans

We need to do more than "hope" 2022 is better. We must ensure that it is. We must acknowledge who the real enemy of our freedoms really are, and it's not each other. It's not black vs. white vs. brown, red, or yellow, nor is it pro gun vs. gun control. It's also not pro-choice vs. pro-life any more than it's straight vs. gay, or conservative vs. liberal. Party registration means nothing either.

When you get down to it, there's little difference between the two. They both serve the same corporate masters. Perhaps that's why the majority of Americans have chosen to become Independent.  We need to find ways of coming together, starting at the local level, and finding solutions with or (preferably) without government's "help" which always comes with strings, and take action. "Sheeple" need not apply. Labels and hyphens mean nothing. We are Americans first, now, and last. 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider subscribing. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on Facebook or whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation.

 

Capital riot arrests: See who's been charged across the U.S.

After 50 rioters sentenced for January 6 insurrection, adebate rages over what justice looks like

Border Crisis Has Biden's Presidency on the Edge

Biden Backpedals on Payments to Illegal Aliens

 

Joe Biden's made-up stories and manner raises serious question about his mental health

Biden's Doctors Say He's 'Healthy' But Suffers Stiff Gait