FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Nov 11

When Will We Stop Young Men From Going To War?

by bcurry

Years ago, I read somewhere that old men begin wars and send young men to fight them.  This was certainly true of the multitude of wars fought during the Twentieth Century.  Today, it would appear that nothing has really changed.  Look around the world, and you cannot help to witness the continuing atrocities caused by wars and the loss of not only young soldiers, but also, and most importantly, the loss of civilian lives.  There is no need to once again recount the statistical losses of war, for what matters most is the real human suffering that one sees among the individuals and families affected by war.

I had family members who fought in both World Wars, and gratefully had survived to return.  Born shortly after WWII, I lived through the Cold War period and the West’s battles with the then Soviet Union.  I lived through the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the subsequent struggles of East European countries for independence.  I lived through the Vietnam conflict, which one must remember like the earlier Korean conflict, was never officially declared a war by Congress. Then came the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 toppling the long time dictator Saddam Hussein and leading to the subsequent decade occupation of Iraq.  Fortunately, the then Prime Minister Jean Chrétien refused to send Canadian troops to fight in Iraq.  However, Canada did join the NATO mission in Afghanistan where in over ten years of fighting, Canadian combatants loss their lives and several were seriously injured.  With the war in Afghanistan going poorly and in light of the gains being made by the Taliban, the U.S. couldn’t wait to get out of that country, much in the same way the Vietnam conflict ended.  And for what?

Now, we have the Ukrainian-Russian war being initiated by 73 year old Vladimir Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years and de facto dictator of Russia since 2000.  To date, while supplying Ukraine with weapons and financial support, no NATO country has boots on the ground in Ukraine.  However, there is little doubt that NATO’s European countries are deeply concerned about Russia’s incursion into Ukraine and potential future threat.  The result is that they have begun to build up their military forces and to expend a larger proportion of their budgets on defence.  Canada, as a NATO member, has also agreed to significantly increase its military spending to meet its continuing commitments to the alliance.

In the Middle East, Israel’s conflicts with Hamas in Gaza, its attacks on Iranian nuclear weapons facilities, and its most recent attack on Hamas negotiators in Qatar, represents a long period of wars and deaths and destruction on both sides.  Indeed, there have been multiple wars with Israel, including those in 2008-09, 2012, 2014, 2021 and an ongoing one since 2023, which began with the infamous October 7 attacks.  According to the Costs of War Project at Brown University, the U.S. spent almost $18 billion on military aid to Israel from October 2023 to October 2024.  While the U.S. continues to provide this massive support, do date President Trump has not indicated that American troops could become directly involved in Gaza.  Time will tell!

People in the Trump administration like to describe the president as a president for peace — this despite the recent change whereby his Secretary of Defense is now the Secretary of War.  In addition, the Trump administration is building up its military presence in the Caribbean, especially off the coast of Venezuela.  Drone attacks have been carried out on boats in international waters, with the administration declaring that these are drug smugglers originating out of Venezuela and supported by the country’s president Nicolás Maduro.  However, some current and former U.S. officials contend that the unspoken goal is the goal is to force Maduro from power.  In other words, regime change.  As of November 6th, the U.S. Senate has twice failed to pass resolutions that would limit Trump’s authority to continue military action against Venezuela or airstrikes against alleged drug vessels.  After long-running wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the combination of the words America and regime change raises alarm bells, both inside and outside the U.S.  Let’s hope that this aging American president isn’t once again ready to sacrifice American young lives in another worthless war.

Afghanistan Canada Defence Defence Donald Trump Foreign Policy Foreign Policy Iran Iraq Today Russia Trump Ukraine US

Leave a comment »
Oct 16

Strange Things Are Happening Over At The U.S. Department of Defence

by bcurry

In recent weeks, some weird things were happening over at the Department of Defence (aka: the Department of War).  Most of it had to do with the current Secretary of Defence, one Pete Hegseth.  Firstly, all of the military brass was summoned to Washington to be spoken to by Hegseth, and in turn President Trump.  This included senior commanding officers stationed on bases outside of the U.S.  For what it’s worth, a Zoom call probably would have been adequate for those matters Hegseth raised.  Instead of anything of real strategic value, Hegseth went on to criticize the prevalence of “fat” soldiers, sailors and airmen.  In addition, he introduced a new requirement that would eliminate the growth of beards by those in the armed forces, calling them “beardos”.  Trump then went on about all kinds of unrelated themes, further baffling the commanders sitting motionless and bewildered in the auditorium.

Next, one has the obvious attack on the free press by Hegseth and company.  In a 21 page document, a new set of strictures was laid out that immediately drew criticism from news organizations representing those accredited to cover Defence department news.  One of its provisions was widely interpreted as requiring reporters to seek prior approval from the government for their coverage.  Failure to comply could lead to a revocation of press passes.  A deadline was subsequently set and has now been passed.  The result is that all the major news outlets, including Fox News and Newsmax, withdrew their journalists from the Pentagon.  In short, this move by Hegseth, formerly of Fox News himself, leaves the Defence department without any mainstream media coverage.  So much for a “free press”!

In an effort to appease Trump’s irrational claims of “insurrections” in American cities, national guard were deployed to Chicago, Illinois and Portland, Oregon.  Trump referred to these cities as “hell holes”, a statement greatly contested by state Governors and the affected mayors.  Visual evidence clearly does not support the administration’s claims, and if anything demonstrates the irrationality of the decision.  If nothing else, these deployments simply create a greater dangerous possibility of confrontations by locals with the authorities.  In both cases, serious crime rates have declined in recent years.  Hegseth even replaced some of the national guard members who apparently were somewhat “obese”, as witnessed by broadcast media upon their arrival in the city.

Last but not least, the Pentagon is carrying out a number of drone strikes in International Waters against suspected boats allegedly coming from Venezuela with drugs destined for the U.S.  However, MSN just reported that the mother of a fisherman in Trinidad and Tobago says her 26-year-old son was among six people killed Tuesday in the Trump administration’s fifth drone strike on boats off the coast of Venezuela.  As yet, there has been no official comment from the Trinidadian government. The U.S. government also has not identified who was on board.  Apparently, this is not the first time there have been claims that the strike may have killed non-Venezuelans.  Some critics in Congress are now questioning whether such drone strikes are illegal under international laws and why no permission was given by Congress.  Once again, Trump has taken it upon himself to initiate these military operations, obviously with the backing of Hegseth.

The above cases are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the use of Defence officials and military personnel and equipment for what can be considered to be nebulous purposes.  For this and other reasons, one can certainly ask what the hell is going on at the Department of Defence?

Defence Free Speech Military Prowess Trump US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Aug 12

Trump’s Use of Military for Domestic Policing Represents a New and Dangerous Trend

by bcurry

Let me take you back to the province of Quebec in the fall of 1970, and what became known as the October Crisis in Canada. The crisis was the culmination of a long series of terrorist attacks perpetrated by the Front de libération du Québec (FLQ), a militant Quebec independence movement, between 1963 and 1970.  On 5 October 1970, the FLQ kidnapped British trade commissioner James Cross in Montreal.  Within the next two weeks, FLQ members also kidnapped and killed Quebec Minister of Immigration and Minister of Labour Pierre Laporte. Quebec’s premier Robert Bourassa and Montreal’s mayor Jean Drapeau called for federal help to deal with the perceived crisis.  In response, then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, by invoking the War Measures Act, deployed the Armed Forces across Quebec and in Ottawa — the only time it had been applied during peacetime in Canadian history.  Seen as inappropriate and overkill at the time by legislators, the federal government subsequently substituted it with the Emergencies Act in 1988 as the modern-day replacement to the previous War Measures Act which had not been designed to deal with domestic security issues.  At the time of the October Crisis and the related deployment of Canadian troops, the American media quickly decried the move as something that could never happen in the U.S. under its constitution!

Well, all that has now changed with the Trump administration’s recent deployment of 4,700 National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles, without the California governor’s request,  to help quell protests that had erupted over immigration raids and to protect the federal agents conducting them.  Just this week, that move has been followed up by the contentious announcement that at least 800 National Guard troops are to be deployed into the streets of Washington, D.C., to supposedly fight a growing crime wave.  What is concerning is that officials have stated that the soldiers in Washington will probably be able to detain people temporarily in certain circumstances until federal agents arrive.  It is also reported that Military leaders are trying to keep the rules of engagement for the D.C. mission as narrow as possible. One Defense Department official reportedly stated that soldiers carrying M-16s, who have been trained to kill adversaries, are not to be put in policing roles.  However, if threatened they can use force in response, whatever that means.  In the case of L.A., some National Guard soldiers were accused of having used overly aggressive tactics against protesters. Trump has also hinted that similar deployments could be done in other urban centres, mentioning Chicago and New York City.

Local citizen protests have already begun in Washington, and are expected no doubt to continue.  The city’s mayor expressed similar disbelief, noting that the last two year’s statistics have shown an actual decline in violent crime ranging from 20 to 25 percent.  The outrage is understandable, since the Canadian 1970 experience led to hundreds of unwarranted arrests of innocent people by the authorities, who in several cases where simply political opponents of the Quebec government at the time.  This created a subsequent backlash among political parties and Canadians, resulting in the legislative changes as noted above. 

In interviews with The New York Times, members of the California National Guard said the deployment to Los Angeles had eroded the morale of the force.  Guard officials also expressed concerns that the L.A. deployment would hurt re-enlistment.  For the military as a whole, the cost could come in recruiting and retention, something critics are warning could also happen in Washington.

In a democracy, deploying troops domestically during peacetime without justification and on a whim can be very damaging from an institutional and political standpoint.  In this case, the president is overstepping his power and needs to be challenged by Congress and in the courts.  Let’s face it, there is no immediate threat to national security and this militarized process undermines the credibility and integrity of local and state police forces.  While the domestic deployment of armed forces to assist communities facing local natural disasters such as wildfires, earthquakes and floods can be justified, their deployment under the above circumstances is unwarranted and represents a dangerous precedent.  

Civil Liberties Defence Donald Trump Federal Government Immigration Police Services Quebec Politics Terrorism Urban Issues US

Leave a comment »
Oct 22

The Power of the American Military Industrial Complex Continues to Grow

by bcurry

Lester B. Pearson, a former Canadian Prime Minister, was quoted in 1955: “The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants, and for peace like retarded pygmies.”  As you may know or not know, as a diplomat Pearson was largely responsible for encouraging the formation of the League of Nations after World War II, which in turn became the United Nations.

Former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in 1953: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”  As a former general during World War II, Eisenhower clearly understood the power of the military industrial complex in the States, a power that has continued to grow from this day forward.

The U.S. is the world’s biggest arms exporter.  As of last year, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the U.S. controlled an estimated 45 percent of the world’s weapons exports.  This is nearly five times more than any other nation and its highest level since the years immediately following the collapse of the Soviet Union.  That is up from 30 percent a decade ago.

The current conflict between Israel and Hamas is just the latest impetus behind a boom in international arms sales that is bolstering profits and weapons-making capacity among American suppliers, especially with respect to Israel’s military.  The U.S. already provides Israel with more than $3 billion in military assistance every year, and Congress is now apparently being asked to increase funding to Israel to the tune of $10 billion in emergency aid due to the conflict.

Even before Israel responded to the deadly Hamas attack, the combination of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the perception of a rising threat from China was spurring a global rush to purchase fighter planes, missiles, tanks, artillery, munitions and other lethal equipment.  Other countries such as Turkey and South Korea are also increasing their military equipment exports, giving purchasers more options at a time when production shortfalls in the U.S. mean it can take years for orders to be filled.  During the Biden administration countries such as Poland, Saudi Arabia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Australia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Japan have signed military equipment deals with the U.S.  Even some small Pacific island nations have done the same. Taiwan alone has a backlog of American weapons orders worth as much as $19 billion.  Canada recently signed an agreement with Lockheed, the world’s largest military contractor, to purchase F-35 fighter jets worth billions of dollars.

Economically, there is little doubt that foreign-based wars can stimulate certain sectors of a country’s economy.  One only has to recall the impact of the Vietnam and Iraq wars to witness the role of American military hardware providers who benefited from the billions of dollars spent in support of American actions in both countries.  Unfortunately, thousands of American lives were loss and thousands more were injured in these two nebulous conflicts.  Military equipment is being sold to all sorts of regimes, several non-democratic, simply to garner support for American foreign policy initiatives in their respective region.

Sadly, there are those who note that the Pentagon and the State Department are continuing to work to find ways to accelerate approval of foreign military sales to keep up with the rising global demand.  The industry has declared that the main bottleneck remains manufacturing capacity, requiring an industrial base capable of meeting these requirements.  Yes, there will always be those that argue if the U.S. industry doesn’t fulfill such perceived needs, then other countries will simply step in to do so.  Regrettably, this appears to be a winnable argument in Congress, with the military industrial complex taking full advantage at the expense of American taxpayers since it is often combined with foreign aid and foreign policy.

Arms Trade Canada Defence Economy Foreign Policy Military Prowess The Middle East Ukraine US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Mar 28

What both Canada and the U.S. have in common when it comes to the Artic and Russia

by bcurry

Back in 2016, a report to Congress by the U.S. Department of Defense appeared to call for American ships to challenge Canadian claims in the Arctic.  The U.S. has had three active marine disputes with Canada in the Arctic, including over 21,000 square kilometres in the Beaufort Sea and two smaller areas of the Dixon Passage, between British Columbia and Alaska.  In addition, in the past the U.S. Coast Guard has sent ice breakers through the Northwest Passage without seeking Canadian permission.  Then came issues surrounding access to minerals and fossil fuels located on the Arctic sea floor, especially as climate change and melting sea ice were helping to open up these waters to year round navigation and maritime shipping.  In 2017, this in turn led to President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau jointly signing a moratorium on new oil and gas leasing in Arctic waters.

However, now enters Russia who we all know are very active in opening up their Arctic waters.  In the past, Russia has made it clear it intends to control the so-called Northern Sea Route off its northern shore, a route that significantly shortens the shipping distance between China and Northern Europe.  U.S. officials have complained that Russia is illegally demanding that other nations seek permission to pass and threatening to use military force to sink vessels that do not comply.  Two years ago, Moscow brought its own war games barrelling through the Bering Sea, with Russian commanders testing weapons and demanding that American fishing boats operating in U.S. fishing waters get out of the way — an order the U.S. Coast Guard advised them to comply with at the time.  In addition, Russia has repeatedly sent military aircraft to the edge of U.S. and Canadian airspace, leading U.S. and Canadian jets to scramble to intercept them and warn them away.

Russia is far ahead of both Canada and the U.S. in creating ice-breaking capacity and particularly in the building of large nuclear-powered icebreakers.  Their nuclear propulsion systems allow them to smash through much thicker ice than conventionally powered vessels giving them a full winter capacity to push through the up to three-metre ice encountered at that certain times of the year. In 2019, the American government began pondering the construction of three heavy icebreakers and three medium-sized vessels.  The Trump Administration ordered an overview of the nation’s icebreaker fleet, with an eye toward fielding a new, rejuvenated fleet by 2029.  The current fleet of Canadian Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships, now under construction, will still have limited icebreaking capacity, and to date little progress has been made toward the actual construction of a planned heavy polar icebreaker.  Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, concerns over Russia’s military capability and intentions in our Arctic waters have grown.  All signs indicate that Russia is reinvesting in its military capabilities and presence in the region.

Canada’s Defence Minister Anita Anand is pledging to modernize the alliance protecting Canada’s North particularly in terms of our Arctic sovereignty.  Hopefully, the Russian threat may actually now lead to Canada and the U.S. to finally reaching agreement on the status of the critical Northwest Passage between the North Atlantic and the Beaufort Sea.  However, some observers will argue that the European Artic waters — comprised of Norway, Denmark and Iceland — are more vulnerable to Russian shipping and military initiatives in the North.  One has to remember that these countries are part of NATO, and we are then, of course, obligated to go to their defence in the event of any military incursion.  Since the Russian threat is also an aerospace one, there is an urgent need to strengthen the current capabilities of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).  First created during the Cold War to protect against a Soviet attack, NORAD is a joint military command between Canada and the U.S. that provides airspace surveillance.  America’s strategic air command’s bombers fly over Canadian aerospace on a daily basis.  However, the technology of NORAD’s north warning system was only last modernized in 1985, and requires an immediate modernization designed to counter imminent dangers of the day — long range bomber threats from the Soviet Union.

What all this means is that Canada and the U.S. had better get their acts together to protect their Arctic maritime and aerospace regions.  The sooner the better!

Canada Climate Change Defence Defence Foreign Policy US

Leave a comment »
Blog at WordPress.com.