12 Comments

Haha, "credentialed?"

Janet Yellen is a moron. When inflation on Day One of the Biden Circus was 1.4%, she took credit for it.

In Week One of the Eve of Destruction when Joe eviscerated energy and declared a "Special Military Operation" against energy, she said it would all be fine.

When inflation -- talking to you crude oil and gas prices -- took off, she said, "It's 'transitory,' babe. Believe me, I have a bloody PhD."

When the whole country was nose deep on their tippy toes in inflation, Madame Credentials said, "Well, this might not be transitory, but it recedes by the end of 2022 and the party is on. Trust me, I have credentials."

Inflation took a long weekend in Nantucket and has come home pissed -- it rained all weekend -- and ready to ruuuuuuuuuumble.

This is going to be very dicey and anybody who thinks a 0.1% here or there means anything is going to have a broken heart.

We are in a bloody recession and it gets worse before it gets better.

Don't believe me. Go with the tart with the credentials -- whatever she mumbles, go long the dark side of that mirror.

"Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most credentialed of us all?"

"You are, toots. Still wrong on everything, but you got the sheepskins, babe."

JLM

www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com

Expand full comment
author

I was born at night, but not last night. Kid who grew up in the 70's decade long debacle and went to a community college knows when there is a recession.

Expand full comment
Feb 24, 2023Liked by Jeffrey Carter

Relative to war- I feel like I am in the US in 1940 or the UK in 1935. People who paid attention knew a war was coming but weren't sure exactly when or how. Most of the country was oblivious or felt immune to the danger. China has a window that is open till the next administration in 2024 unless they can get Biden elected again. As much as our elite like the fact that they are bleeding Russia, the Chinese like it more that Russia is also bleeding us. My only question is whether the Chinese just try to take Taiwan or do they feel they can take us off the board with one major nuclear strike. I think the second scenario is unlikely but possible.

Expand full comment

Big difference in the US pre-WWII is that a chap named George Catlett Marshall VMI '01 was made Chief of Staff of the Army on the same day the Krauts rolled into Poland in 1939.

Our Army was the 17th largest in the world and Marshall already had a plan to standup more than 200 divisions -- think about that, 200 divisions and all those men and gear, the greatest startup in history came off one guy's iPad -- and had been the Commandant of the Infantry School at Benning and had a book on the best Majors and Lt Colonels in the Army -- Eisenhower, Bradley, Patton, the list goes on.

He ordered the Louisiana Maneuvers during which Patton and Eisenhower shone like the sun. Marshall relieved all generals over the age of 55 and canned 30/40 general officers in the 1st/2nd Louisiana Maneuvers. He was a brilliant talent spotter.

He knew then Patton was an asshole, but also knew he would be the best American pursuit general in the war when it was time to pursue. He kept him on the bench until after D Day and then handed him the 3rd US Army and said, "It's your turn, George."

Patton and his Army saved our bacon after Bastogne and drove the Krauts home and put them in their grave. Marshall knew who Patton was.

Marshall finally stood up right at 95 divisions -- took a huge risk that the Russians would stay in the war (unlike WWI when they folded) and tie down a huge swath of the German war machine.

He also figured out we could defeat Germany first and then defeat Japan, so European Theater divisions could be shifted to the Pacific. At the end of the war in Europe, the 101st Abn Div was already on orders to make the move.

He also had identified every critical industry and factory to make the goods for what would be the best Army, Navy, and Air Force (Army Air Corps) in the history of warfare and where a guy could buy enough cotton and woolen underwear to outfit 16,000,000 men.

Ford was making Jeeps one week after Pearl Harbor.

The US was producing 10,000 planes a month in the last month of the war. This guy Marshall put the right people in place to make that happen.

Churchill called him THE Architect of Victory and the US was the Arsenal of Democracy.

As a Second Act, George saved Europe from going full on Commie with the Marshall Plan. He got around: Gen'l of the Armies, Envoy to China, Sec State, Sec Defense, Nobel Peace Prize, Marshall Plan.

Very impressive cat who refused a $1MM advance on his memoirs, saying, "I did not enter public service to aggrandize my purse."

Here's the problem today, the real problem -- we don't have anybody in leadership, in the Army, in politics who could hold Marshall's horse. Our team is fixated on pronouns and CRT/DEI rather than the lethality of the force.

Nobody thought to crank up the US/NATO ammo plants when the Russians attacked Ukraine. Geo Marshall would have had 155mm and 120mm ammo in a boat and headed to Ukraine on Day Three.

Be worried about that.

American soldiers when well led and equipped can open a can of whip ass on any military force in the world. Our nuclear tech would incinerate China -- even with its 400 new ICBM tubes built in the last 4 years -- and they know that.

There are a dozen US Boomers (we have 14) in the drink every day with 20-24 tubes with 12 MIRV warheads on each rocket. Every day. Our adversaries can't even find those bad boys and they know it. We have half of them targeted on Russia and the other half on China -- but we can mix and match at our leisure.

This current environment is about who is going to kick the bullies in the nuts and beat them into the ground. No more complicated than that -- school yard bullies and good guys.

Right now, the Ukrainians are doing it. The smart play is to fund the fuck out of them and to recognize $100Bn/year is a small price to pay to defang that prick Putin. It's literally the rounding error in the US defense budget.

Send the Ukrainians every bit of first rate gear we have -- and it is way better than the Russians who are bringing 1956 IFVs out of storage. Imagine that. An infantry fighting vehicle that cannot stop a .50 cal bullet?

We take Putin out and Xi asks, "Who loves me, baby?" Nobody, you asshole.

And, yes, this is our Munich Moment. And, yes this is for real. And, yes it will take men with balls like Geo Marshall to run the table.

"The sons of tigers are still tigers even if they do not know they are tigers."

Time to identify who's a tiger.

JLM

www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com

Expand full comment
author

We don't have a George C Marshall at the helm right now. George C Marshall's 2023 replacements are more concerned if they should address someone as George or Georgina. In WW1, the Russians couldn't afford to keep pressure on Germany. They were engaged in a revolution. In WW2, Stalin seized the opportunity to create a client base across Europe. One way to look at D-Day is if we hadn't, eventually Stalin would have gotten France himself.

Expand full comment

No, we don't.

Obama put stars on a bunch of political generals who were woke.

This is why the US w/ more forces, better gear, air superiority, unlimited firepower, perfect intel, and a light infantry enemy lost in Afghanistan.

The woke generals could not think strategically and execute tactically because they were not really warriors.

Every general who was in that war who had been to C&GSC or the War College should have their degree rescinded and be demoted two ranks.

It wasn't that hard to figure out, but it took the US 10 years to understand A'stan was a tribal, narcotic cess pool run by thieves.

There was a reason it was called the Graveyard of Empires.

[Note to self: Before getting stuck in the mud in a joint called the Graveyard of Empires, read history and figure out if these people want our help.]

JLM

www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com

Expand full comment
author

It doesn't have to be 1940. People WANT it to be 1940. Inertia can drive decision making, especially poor decision making. There are several factors that the Chinese have not figured out how to overcome if they invaded Taiwan. A big one being an amphibious landing. HItler would not have engaged in Operation Barbarossa when he did if he could have figured out how to attack England. That is what makes D-Day even more amazing, although they had experience in Africa and Sicily. For what it's worth, the invasion of Italy from Sicily didn't go as planned but that was probably the fault of the terrain AND the poor generaling of Mark Clark.

The thing Hitler did was call France/England's bluff every time. It is well chronicled by Churchill in his treatise on the Second World War. The only ping I have in my stomach about Ukraine is that we know Putin is a bad guy, and not putting up a ruckus now invites more from him. Snap judgements in the media are probably wrong on both sides. What's the long game look like?

Expand full comment

The Americans were and are the best amphibious military force in the history of warfare. We invented the tactic at scale.

The measure of an amphibious landing is simple -- Did we get the forces ashore and can they fight tonight?

After that, it's a ground war.

The US in Europe landed successfully in North Africa, Sicily, Salerno, Anzio, Southern France, and the Big Enchilada - Normandy.

Each of those landings achieved tactical surprise at the beach. Even Normandy was a surprise. How TF did that happen? Military disinformation.

The US was able to weave airborne assaults into the mix to prevent the enemy from reinforcing and pushing the spearhead back into the water.

Anzio was a successful landing, but the exploitation was timid and the Krauts came down to the beach head. If Mark Clark had ordered the landed forces to attack and push the beach head out, Anzio would have been a huge success.

Good landing. Shitty exploitation due to a timid commander.

In the Pacific, the Marines and the Army turned amphibious warfare into an art form. It was the trump card that MacArthur used to march to Tokyo.

Oddly, despots who have clawed their way to the top of the heap are always good in a pinch. They always bluff well and they prey upon honorable men who actually think there is a deal to be made with a hungry wolf. There is not.

Remember when Russia said there would be "consequences" if Finland and Sweden joined NATO? Haha.

The only consequence has been the addition of a first rate Army on Russia's northwestern flank. Russia and Putin are a bluff with a shitty army, but the willingness to bleed their stupid people.

Despots only understand a bayonet through the neck. That is the lesson of history. There has never been a reformed despot who has ever rejoined the community of civilized nations. Ever.

JLM

www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com

Expand full comment
Feb 24, 2023Liked by Jeffrey Carter

But countries like China can do stupid things. Hitler invaded Russia. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Dictators often overreach. Just because a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be difficult it doesn't mean they won't try. That also increases the likelihood of them taking us out first. Destroy us as a viable country and Taiwan and the rest of Asia is a walk in the park. Ukraine is just a distraction from the real war, in my opinion. My concern is that everyone thinks that China is a "rational" actor and a nuclear attack is inconceivable. I think nuclear war is more conceivable now than at any other time in my life and I am 70 years old. Russia is no threat to us. Other then marginal support from us, Ukraine should be the concern of and a teaching moment for Europe. China is an existential threat. Putin is just a neighborhood bully and the neighborhood can stand up to him. Or not.

Expand full comment

Whilst agreeing with everything you say -- I am 72 -- I think history has taught us this -- the failure to deal with hegemonic tyrants at the first instance results in a wider and bigger problem.

Even seemingly rational nations have members in leadership who are irrational. I think Xi is quite rational -- he intends to become the single superpower in the world and be able to dictate to the world how every cow in Christendom eats its cabbage.

Russia is a threat to NATO and Europe and we are a signatory to a bit of paper we helped write called the Atlantic Charter that in Article V lays out the proposition that an attack on any NATO member merits a call on the strength of every NATO member.

It is, actually, a damn good treaty and has brought peace to a continent that used to have a major war every 25 years.

It has, however, been bastardized, but understandably so. The US pulled the world's bacon from the fire twice -- once in Europe and once in Europe/Pacific.

The world has grown comfortable that they can send us their lunch bill for defense and we will pay it. This was never the NATO deal and it was really not until Trump that anybody protested vehemently.

We got sloppy and let Germany start spending overnight liaisons with the Russian bear via NordStream I/II.

We gave Putin the bloody leverage and paid him to fit us for a noose.

We did this.

So, now we have to undo it.

Putin wants to re-create the Russian Empire that never existed. He can be stopped. He must be stopped. He is a colossal bluff -- economy is 25% smaller than Italy, for shit army, unnecessary to the needs of civilized countries, an angry little shit.

If the US/NATO/West don't go wobbly, the Ukrainians drive the Russians out and the Russian people get rid of Putin.

If the world stops Putin, they also influence China. This is about three personalities: Putin, Xi, and the American POTUS. We apparently got last pick.

Within the next week we will learn China is going to sell kamikaze drones directly to Russia. We are getting ready to face a merged threat.

https://themusingsofthebigredcar.com/the-chinese-takeout-menu-kamikaze-drones-and-other-stuff-from-column-thrfee/

There is no upside to minimizing the risk here. There is a huge downside to minimizing the risk here. There is a huge upside to defanging the Russians and Putin.

Let's depants the bully and call it a day. Could save a lot of trouble later on.

JLM

www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com

Expand full comment
Feb 24, 2023Liked by Jeffrey Carter

That was quite the Freudian slip! She's none too bright, fugly hair, and dresses like a clown. Not attractive one iota too boot. Sorry, had to get that off of my chest.

Expand full comment
author

Harvard girl.

Expand full comment