When we look at Ukraine, we may see events but I see a psychological campaign. That could be narrowed down to a propaganda campaign. The West has to do much better in the propaganda arena. We cannot be failing at the essentials.
I don’t mean lies but if it is one thing you can count on, it is that Russia is lying about almost everything. Of course we have a better narrative so why don’t we use and take advantage of that? Instead we get a lot of “what we won’t do” from our leaders.
That is not the stuff to win a battle or war with. That is only defining your limitations to the enemy. On the other side, Putin makes every attempt not to be defined. He only forfeits any mystery about himself by his actions. That part is something like a political campaign. You define your political opponent early and often.
Now I am not saying it is the same as politics. However, many in this country have gotten so addicted to making everything into politics. Imagine if we broke down WWII into a political debate. It wouldn’t have helped anything. But that is what the new Left has become, a religion of politics. We have had that discussion here before.
At some point people have to realize there is something more than politics in the world. That is a dangerous view. We saw ideology was the great problem with Obama.
So Fiona Hill had an elaborate interview with Politico. Yes, she is of Trump impeachment fame but she does offer some insight other than disliking Trump now. It is a miniature historical lesson. (not a revision) It does not say Putin is a great student of history either.
Why is it that the West should suffer from a predictability crisis? The Left believes we must be predictable in every way and form,. Here is where that is the problem.
What have you if there is no war you are willing to fight, and that is your position, but your enemy sees no war it is unwilling to wage? Or in other words, there is nothing you would go to war for but your enemy will go to war for anything and everything. See what a predicament that is? It does leave self-defense but even that is determined by will.
So then everything you do is dependent on will or public perception – what people, by polls or other measure, are willing to do. Everything becomes a debate or public poll.
Russia doesn’t seem to have that problem. It has a man at the helm, be it a madman or monger, who is not weighed down by the will of the people. In fact that is irrelevant to him or his goals. We now see what happens when people don’t like what he does. So what?
So I am not arguing in favor of their system, but it is just the way it is. They are not saddled by popular perception. A similar thing works with China.
We say there is an ethical rule you cannot even talk about killing the leader of a country. Russia announces its main intention is to take out President even deploying assassins to kill him and members of government. His removal is the chief objective.
If we lay down all these lines, it is only a matter of time before the enemy challenges those lines. Then what? However, you have forfeited your element of unpredictability. You have only given your enemy a road map of what you will do, so that they can plan around your lines or use them to their advantage. What you ‘will not do’ is not a defense plan. Those are only your own limitations, not your enemy’s. They freely do anything, raising villages, bombing civilians, threaten nuclear facilities committing genocide.
As much as maybe the world has changed over the last fifty years, we have only grown more predictable. We have to stop putting ourselves into a box. And once in a while, if not frequently, we have to look at things from the enemies’ perspective.
There is a school of thought that thinks there can be an advantage to being predictable That is when your enemy does not expect your non-conventional means. Then you could throw them off with the element of surprise. Maybe but would it be better not to have strapped limitations on yourself first, like a suicide bomber?
So this is the way the debate is playing out over the no fly zones. Can’t do this, can’t do that. It is impossible.
Then we have to factor in that we have a General like Milley. We saw what he did with China and making strategic promises to them. What good is that, what did we gain?
The other step here in this process is we must know who our friends are or who are not friends. You would think we would know that. Why act as if your enemy is your friend? What does that get you?
We have to stop playing these games, which are only like running psy-ops on ourselves. The enemy doesn’t care. They laugh incredulously at you as you bang your head.
But America is now awake to its threats, it was asleep for too long.
Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022