SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: denizen48 who wrote (1457261)5/17/2024 10:59:25 AM
From: Broken_Clock1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Respond to of 1572094
 
US chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says NATO will deploy troops to Ukraine

Andre Damon

@Andre__Damon

10 hours ago

In a major escalation of the US-NATO war with Russia in Ukraine, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Charles Q. Brown told the New York Times Thursday that the NATO military alliance will “eventually” send significant numbers of active-duty NATO troops to Ukraine, which the newspaper said meant the deployment was “inevitable.”



Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. [AP Photo/Kevin Wolf]In asserting that NATO sending troops is “inevitable,” the Times means the decision has already been made, and all that is being awaited is the determination on how best to announce the escalation to the public.

Brown’s statement that NATO will send troops to Ukraine, after US President Joe Biden categorically ruled out such a move because it would lead to “World War III,” continues the pattern: Every time the White House has said it would not do something in Ukraine, it has subsequently done it.

It is high time for President Joe Biden to go on national television and inform the American people that a decision has been made to send US and NATO troops to fight Russia in Ukraine, that this is a massive escalation of the war, that there is a high probability that this will lead to a nuclear war, and that hundreds of millions of people will be killed if that happens.

Biden should also explain how the US government, or whatever is left of it, would deal with the obliteration of a large portion of the country. He should also explain clearly why the admission of Ukraine into NATO justifies risking such an outcome.

The claim that the troops being sent would merely be “training” Ukrainian forces, rather than serving as frontline troops, is meaningless. Once inside Ukraine, they would come under fire from Russian forces, leading to direct retaliation against Russian aircraft and air-to-ground sites by NATO forces.

The Times makes this clear: “As a part of NATO, the United States would be obligated under the alliance’s treaty to aid in the defense of any attack on the trainers, potentially dragging America into the war.”

Brown’s claim that the decision will be made “eventually” and “over time” is purely to obfuscate the fact that the US’s leading civilian military official has publicly announced an action that Russian officials have said would lead to direct attacks on US troops.

In fact, if there is anything the NATO war effort lacks, it is time. The Times article admits this, declaring, “Ukraine’s manpower shortage has reached a critical point, and its position on the battlefield in recent weeks has seriously worsened as Russia has accelerated its advances.”

In other words, the US’s strategy of “fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian” has played itself out, and there are no longer enough Ukrainian troops left to hold the front. Any effort to rescue the Ukrainian position will require the rapid deployment not just of NATO “trainers” but of active-duty combat forces to fight on the front line.

The Times itself admits that planning for the NATO deployments inside Ukraine is already far advanced. It reports that “NATO last month asked Gen. Christopher G. Cavoli, the supreme allied commander for Europe, to come up with a way for the alliance to do more to help Ukraine.”

The declaration by the US Joint Chiefs Chairman Marks a new stage in a concerted and orchestrated campaign to legitimize the concept of sending NATO troops to Ukraine, which all US and other NATO politicians had vocally declared was beyond the pale.

In February, French President Emmanuel Macron declared that NATO should consider sending ground troops to Ukraine, which both he and Biden categorically promised not to do. Within weeks, Macron was joined by officials from France, Canada, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Poland. Last week, officials from Estonia echoed these statements.

Now, a US official has gone even further than Macron, not only declaring that sending NATO troops should be considered, but that it is “inevitable.”

The carefully stage-managed presentation of the US decision to send troops to Ukraine follows the exact same script that was used to introduce the sending of armored vehicles, tanks, fighter jets and long-range missiles.

In each case, the first stage is a categorical denial. In March 2022, Biden declared, “The idea that we’re going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews—just understand, don’t kid yourself, no matter what y’all say, that’s called World War III.”

In June 2022, Macron echoed these sentiments, declaring, “we are not entering the war. … Thus, it has been agreed not to supply certain weapons—including attack aircraft or tanks.”

By January 2023, Macron had declared “France will provide light combat tanks and continue its support in air defense,” followed by the announcement by Biden that “the United States will be sending 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine.”

The script was then repeated in the decision to send long-range weapons to Ukraine and to allow them to be used against Crimea and other parts of Russia.

In May 2022, Biden declared, “We are not encouraging or enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders.” In September 2022, Biden declared “We’re not going to send to Ukraine rocket systems that strike into Russia.”

But last month, the Biden administration announced that it had secretly sent long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine, which had already been used to strike Crimea, which Russia claims as its own territory. Earlier this month, UK Foreign Minister David Cameron declared that Ukraine has the “right” to use weapons provided by NATO to strike any part of Russian territory.

Beyond the Times’ declaration that the US has decided to send troops to Ukraine, the article makes another staggering admission: The United States has already sent defense contractors to Ukraine to service advanced weapons sent by NATO countries.

The article declares, “a small number” of US defense contractors “have already been allowed in [to Ukraine], under State Department authorities, to work on specific weapons systems like Patriot air defenses.”

The article quotes Alexander S. Vindman, a leading architect of the US war with Russia in Ukraine, who declared, “There is an element of ally malpractice in the fact that we’re providing masses of Western equipment to Ukraine, but not giving them the resources to sustain it.”

When, last year, the US announced that it was sending M1 Abrams battle tanks to Ukraine, the World Socialist Web Site warned, “The significance of Biden’s announcement lies less in the battlefield impact of the tanks than in the consequences of deploying them.” We warned that these weapons “will require a massive logistical network inside Ukraine, involving large numbers of specialist American contractors. Attacks on these supply networks and American personnel servicing the tanks will then be used to press for implementation of a ‘no-fly zone’ and the deployment of US and NATO troops to Ukraine.”

Under conditions in which the Ukrainian battle front is nearing collapse, these plans have been significantly accelerated, raising the threat of a rapid escalation of a direct war between NATO and Russia.



To: denizen48 who wrote (1457261)5/17/2024 11:10:14 AM
From: longz  Respond to of 1572094
 
BWAHAHAHA!



To: denizen48 who wrote (1457261)5/17/2024 2:47:24 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 1572094
 
You work at the FDIC?

May 17, 2024

If you want to understand the complete dysfunction of the federal government, look no further than the case of Marty Gruenberg.

At least for now-- and hopefully not much longer-- he is the petty tyrant in charge of the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation); he has served in that position for 10 out of the last 13 years and has been on the FDIC’s board since 2005.

In short, Gruenberg is the FDIC, and FDIC is Gruenberg.

This makes him extremely culpable for what a recent investigation into the FDICdescribes as a destructive culture of “sexual harassment and interpersonal misconduct” that is “hostile, abusive, [and] unprofessional”.

For example, several FDIC meetings took place at strip clubs while female employees were openly rated on their looks... and expected to have sex with their male supervisors in exchange for promotions and higher ratings.

Senior bank examiners routinely sent dick pics to the women on their teams and spoke openly in the workplace about sex with their subordinates.

Complaints of sexual harassment at the FDIC are off the charts. Yet management seldom disciplined anyone. Quite often, in fact, agency executives ‘solved’ the sexual harassment problem by promoting serial offenders to higher positions, just to get them out of the field.

Meanwhile, black employees were told they were "token" hires to fill a quota. Gay employees were referred to as "little girls," which led to several employees to pretend to be straight.

All of this occurred under the leadership of Gruenberg-- a loyal lieutenant of the Biden-Obama- Lizzie Warren syndicate-- all of whom claim to be champions of #MeToo, Black Lives Matter, and LGBTQ+ pride.

But as it turns out, these people stand for absolutely nothing. More on that in a moment.

If these findings weren’t damning enough, the investigation also revealed that Martin Gruenberg is just a terrible human being. He’s a horrific boss with a nasty personality and short temper.

Employees described Gruenberg as “aggressive,” “harsh,” “emotional,” “vitriol[ic],” “prosecutorial,” “disrespectful,” and having a “short fuse.” And it is their belief that it would be nearly impossible to have “a cultural transformation that prioritizes a more positive workplace culture” under Gruenberg.

The investigators also noted that employees across the FDIC had “a great reluctance to deliver bad news to Marty Gruenberg,” because he would explode, and “shoot the messenger” rather than focus on solving the problem.

Remember, the FDIC is the agency that oversees banks. And employees were terrified to tell the boss that banks were in trouble. Gee, what a surprise that a bunch of banks failed!

It’s worth mentioning that Gruenberg’s boss, President Biden, made a promise when he was elected:

“I’m not joking when I say this: If you’re ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot. On the spot. No ifs or buts.”

Yet has Gruenberg been fired? Nope. Why is that?

Because if Biden fires Gruenberg, he’d have to nominate a replacement… who would then have to clear a risky Senate confirmation. And if that confirmation failed, the Vice Chairman of the FDIC would take over the agency.

And since the Vice Chairman is from the other party, Joe Biden is sticking with the swamp creature Marty Gruenberg.

This really just proves how these people stand for absolutely nothing.

All they care about is their stupid party. They don’t care about the employees at the FDIC. They don’t care about the safety of the banking system. They don’t care about any of the principles they claim to support, i.e. #metoo, BLM, LGBTQ+, mental health, etc.

All they care about is their party.

Even Elizabeth Warren, who has been outspoken against Wall Street “boy’s clubs” and inappropriate work environments in the financial sector, has been defending Gruenberg and fighting to keep him in his job.

Almost no one is speaking out against the blatant misogyny, racism, and homophobia under Gruenberg’s watch.

Because, again, they don’t actually care. They only pay lip service to these ideas when it benefits them.

By the way, Gruenberg is far from the only case of an incompetent, destructive federal official keeping his/her job.

A recent Congressional investigation also found the FTC to be a “toxic work environment” and “beset by dysfunction and chaos stemming from poor leadership and ideological bullying of its Chair [Lina Khan]”. She, too, remains in her job.

Alejandro Mayorkas, the guy in charge of securing the overrun southern border as head of Homeland Security, also still has his job.

Rachelle Wolensky, who was in charge of the CDC during COVID, was so incompetent that even far-left news outlets wanted her resignation.

You probably remember the CDC’s incomprehensible guidance regarding masks, vaccines, social distancing, and more. Plus she infamously tried to commandeer authority to take over the entire $10+ trillion US housing market… before being shot down by the Supreme Court.

She, too, was never fired.

And don’t even get me started on Tony Fauci, who was given a lush retirement with honor and distinction, not to mention a huge pension.

These are just a few of the bigger names which don’t even scratch the surface of countless career bureaucrats who should have been fired a long time ago.

Don’t get me wrong-- there are so many amazing people who work for the government. But the bureaucracy has created a system where it’s easier to promote bad apples and keep them around than to fire them. No wonder so many hapless stooges rise to the top.

We talk so much about the trajectory of the US economy. And frankly, the complete dysfunction and lack of confidence in the federal government has a lot to do with it.

Fixing this is no mystery: a private company would eliminate the rot and bring in new leadership to change the culture.

But if the people in charge were going to change anything, they would have done it already. They simply don’t care.

They’d rather accept the incompetence and put the needs of their pathetic political party ahead of the country.

schiffsovereign.com