“Diversity, inclusion are tools for national defense”
The Secretary of Woke Warfare has some thoughts about Russia’s expanding nuclear arsenal.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Russia is “modernizing and expanding its nuclear arsenal” as its invasion of Ukraine continues and Russian President Vladimir Putin has made threats about using nuclear weapons in the conflict.
Austin spoke on Friday at a ceremony for the new head of U.S. Strategic Command (Stratcom), Anthony Cotton. The agency is responsible for strategic nuclear deterrence, nuclear operations and missile defense. Cotton took over for Charles Richard, who had served in the role since 2019 and retired Friday.
Cotton, like Austin, is another professional victim claiming that he’s the victim of racist oppression, as I documented a while back.
“Here I am as a lieutenant general in the United States Air Force,” then Lt. Gen Anthony Cotton whined to Air Force Magazine. “When I see what happened to Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Rayshard Brooks—and the list goes on and on.”
“That could be me,” he claimed.
Last year, Cotton claimed that “diversity, inclusion are tools for national defense” and that diversity is a “warfighting imperative”.
“This team is exactly what we are looking for,” Cotton said of the Diversity and Inclusion Council at Malmstrom Air Force Base. “It is a diverse and unified team that is having crucial conversations about diversity and inclusion.”
Russia isn’t having crucial conversations about diversity and inclusion, but about building the biggest and deadliest arsenal for killing people possible.
Austin acknowledged several challenges facing Stratcom in the near future, including the expanding Russian nuclear arsenal and Chinese nuclear forces that are growing, modernizing and diversifying.
“And as the Kremlin continues its cruel and unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine, the whole world has seen Putin engage in deeply irresponsible nuclear saber-rattling,” he said.
“So make no mistake. Nuclear powers have a profound responsibility to avoid provocative behavior, and to lower the risk of proliferation, and to prevent escalation and nuclear war,” he continued.
It’s not the job of the secretary of defense to spout meaningless nonsense like this. That’s the role of the State Department.
Austin isn’t supposed to lecture Putin on the responsibility of nuclear powers to avoid proliferation but to tell us that America has Russia beat. It used to be the Euros who would offer worthless virtue signaling like this. Now our military brass scolds while unilaterally disarming.
Russia’s responsibility is both below and above Austin’s pay grade. Instead of doing his job of building a deadlier military, he’s making the military more useless and politically correct, and urging Russia to do the same.
That’s not happening.
It’s up to world leaders to decide how provocative they want to be. And it’s the job of defense people to let them be as provocative as they decide to be. Biden has unilaterally surrendered and Austin is facilitating the surrender.
Westman says
Yes, more diversity and a woke military makes good sense if you think war is like the “Call Of Duty” computer game – after losing, it’s a restart from your former status. That’s delusion.
Ukranian citizens deserve our sympathy as they watch their country being dismantled because Western powers say they can pay the Ukrainian government salaries, provide the weapons, and Ukraine will, “win”. By paying salaries the US has gone from proxy war to direct war.
If, say, Mexico paid a third country’s government salaries and gave them weapons to conduct war against the US, would the US not consider Mexico to be at war with the US? Not too far from the drug trade that’s killing our youth, is it?
Western analysts are saying the new Russian forces being formed for a more serious escalation are untrained raw troops. They are actually trained reservists, maybe a little rusty, but prepared. And now Russia has its, “Merchant Of Death”, given back in a trade, who can run around and collect some of those Russian tech weapons from former and current clients.
It may be that too much of what the media is reporting is much like the former news shading by Twitter – Propaganda.
Math and logic point toward Ukraine ultimately losing the war. US high-tech weapons, due to long manufacturing lead times, are a vulnerability when stocks run low. Russia has more standard weaponry, tanks, artillery, vehicles, and more importantly, more soldiers than Ukraine and is poised for a heightened campaign in wintertime.
Correct me if wrong, the last wintertime war conducted by the US was in North Korea and it didn’t go well. I personally had a long conversation with a Korean Vet who had barely survived Pusan.
The Ukraine civilians won’t have the needed infrastructure to survive winter and more will become refugees.
We can hope that cool heads prevail before there is war between Russia and NATO which would ruin Old Europe, Russia, and much of the infrastructure and economy of the US.
The US leaders need to get real, more competent, and avoid direct war with Russia. One could be inclined to think they have a plan to reduce the US, “deplorables”, as cannon fodder? It worked in the 1960s, give deferments to the college bound and send the rest. More Wokes surviving to vote.
gravenimage says
The US is not waging war against Russia; Russia has invaded Ukraine. And so far Ukraine is doing quite well in pushing Russia out of their land–how is that an indication of Russia winning? Generally losing ground is not an indication of victory.
Westman, I know you have counseled before that the world should kowtow to Russian aggression, but this is almost always a bad idea, be it appeasing Putin or Jihadists.
Westman says
Don’t believe everything you hear from media, and certainly not from a government which abandoned Afghanistan, leaving people who helped us, to die at the hands of the Taliban.
I have never said the world should find Russian aggression acceptable. War is the lowest, vile, form of politics which exports its misery, everywhere.. I have said the West should not die for it and we are very close to direct war with Russia. Somehow we have forgotten that cheering for a side in a competition does not determine the outcome.
I don’t like the idea more than you of Ukraine losing. It’s just reality. Russia’s goal is to make certain that Ukraine is never able to mount another offensive action in the Donbas. Being trained in STEM disciplines I would predict, numerically, short of direct war by the West, Ukraine will lose. Zelenskyy walked away from the first Russian offer for a settlement and there won’t be another unless requested by Ukraine.
This is not like when we forced the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan by injecting weapons. This war is on Russia’s doorstep and it is the West which must project very expensive long distance power.
A reality is we are drawing down our own stocks of sophisticated weaponry and that of our allies. When the war boils down to conventional “junk” weapons, Russia has more than Ukraine can hope for and 4 times the available troops.
gravenimage says
Westman, I don’t just follow American media–I also keep up with media from around the world, *including* Russian media like Pravda.
Most of the support for Ukraine from the US has been training and materiel. This is more that just cheering, and may indeed have an effect on the outcome. Of course, without the bravery of Ukrainians, this would come to nothing.
But the US has not declared war on Russia, and despite threats Russia does not seem eager to attack *any* NATO nation.
Then, Ukraine is not acting offensively in driving Russia out of their territory. Again, it was Russia that invaded Ukraine.
And so far it is a fact that Ukraine is driving Russia back–the implication that this is scientifically impossible does not hold water.
As for a “settlement”–this is Russia looking for surrender of Ukrainian land–it is understandable that President Zelensky doesn’t want to reward Putin’s invasion of his nation. And this would likely just be a ceasefire in any case, while Russia tries to grab more conscripts off the street and line up some more Iranian drones.
As for Afghanistan, they were indeed on the Soviet border, just as Ukraine is on the border with Russia.
But few Russians want to fight and die in Ukraine. Military-aged men have been fleeing the country in droves.
And I don’t think the West is running out of weapons any time soon. And why have weapons if you are unwilling to use them to defend against aggressors?
“Freedom Must Be Armed Better Than Tyranny”
–Volodymyr Zelensky
clem.alford@talk21.com says
You are being misled by the west’s MSM who are hired hacks for government. Listen to Scott Ritter and Retired Generals who say Ukraine is loosing the war and would have already lost it bar aid from US, EU and NATO intervention.
gravenimage says
Let’s assume it is true that Ukraine would have lost to Russian invaders without aid from the US, EU, and NATO nations. (Iffy premise, but let’s go with it).
But Ukraine *is* receiving such aid. It is generally only supporters of Russian aggression who are upset that free nations are helping Ukraine remain free herself.
gravenimage says
Russia Expands Nuke Arsenal, Biden Expands Woke Arsenal
………………………………
I rather doubt that Russia is expanding its nuclear arsenal, since it has not even been able to expand its conventional weaponry–much of what it is reduced to using now is out-dated Soviet-era junk.
That being said, the “wokeness” being imposed on the US military is suicidal insanity.
clem.alford@talk21.com says
Absolutely!
gravenimage says
Thanks.
bill carr says
Diversity, Inclusivity and Equality. The initials of which spell DIE
James Lincoln says
It’s even worse than that, bill.
Progressives use the term “equity” rather than “equality”.
Equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Equity is actually ‘group equality’ – something that makes sense in the context of stock ownership. Let’s say in a company, you own 70% of the stock and I own 30%, then the ‘vote’ of a stock you own would have a weight more than twice mine, since you own a bigger percentage. That’s a perfectly legitimate way to assign control, but it is ‘unfair’ to the stocks owned by minority shareholders
However, assigning this concept to people, particularly in a democracy, is dangerous, since it would lead to group conflicts, and attempts by different groups to poach more members or rig systems to grab power. Which is why the equality of individuals is more important than equality of groups
James Lincoln says
Infidel,
Good job pointing out the fine details!
gravenimage says
Good point, James.