A plaque on the table of Russian delegation is seen before the Russia - NATO talks in Brussels, Belgium. © Sputnik / Alexey Vitvitsky
Axios: Sullivan seeks advice from Russia hawks ahead of talks on Ukraine
A group of Russia experts urged National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan to send more arms to the Ukrainians when he spoke with them ahead of this week’s high-stakes diplomatic meetings with Russian officials, participants told Axios.
Why it matters: By soliciting advice from the hawkish pockets in the foreign policy establishment, including those who served under former President Trump, the Biden administration is considering all options while weighing how to discourage Russian President Vladimir Putin from invading Ukraine — and punish him if he does.
* "It’s always smart to engage with outsiders. There’s never a downside,” said Michael McFaul, a National Security Council official under President Obama who later served as ambassador to Russia.
* “Jake is not afraid to interact with specialists, including those who may disagree with him,” said McFaul, who declined to confirm last Monday's videoconference or his participation in it.
* Officials routinely meet with outside Russia experts with a diverse set of views and have welcomed "their expertise as we address this crisis," NSC spokesperson Emily Horne told Axios.
Read more ....
Update: Biden Seeking Advice From Russia Hawks On How To Handle Ukraine Talks (Zero Hedge)
WNU Editor: Getting advice from neocons. When does that end well?
But this desire by the administration to get advice from groups that have failed miserably in protecting US national security interests tells me that the White House really has no strategy on how to deal with Russia.
And it shows.
Monday's U.S. - Russia meeting did not end well, and today's NATO - Russian meeting found no common ground .... Russia & NATO fail to find common ground – Moscow (RT).
And while there are hints of future talks .... No Ukraine breakthrough, but NATO and Russia eye more talks (AP), I am not optimistic that there will be progress.
7 comments:
" peaking in influence during the administration of George W. Bush, when they played a major role in promoting and planning the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and the 2003 invasion of Iraq"
1) So neocons wanting to go into Afghanistan was a mistake?
2) Iraq. If you are an honest person (big IF) and you have a way back machine check out the statements from Kerry, Gore, Hillary and others about Iraq in the late 1990s. Iraq attacked Iran (22 September 1980), Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (29 January 1991).
So in a 10 year period attacked 3 neighboring countries.
Threatened a 4th county. Attacked it.
A honest person would remember the delays of inspections sometimes by days. When a surprise inspection is delayed 2 or 3 days, what is a person suppose to think?
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
“There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
Dec, 5, 2001.
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.”
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.
He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction. “[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
the year. now: 2022
Obviously, 3:34 spends most of their time viewing porn, when they are not trolling the internet. When discussing neocons or any other political group, you want to talk track record.
Neocons did get special scrutiny by liberals until GWOT. So looking at GWOT and the run up to it is germane.
Biden Team: Hey, guys, let's get advice from the folks who haven't managed to win a CONFLICT since 1945, let alone a war. I mean, just look at their CV. Korea. Cuba. Vietnam. Somalia. Iraq. Libya. Afghanistan. Yep, we can learn a thing or two from these guys!
Russia won Korea? Pray tell.
Post a Comment