Western media are all reporting that the Joe Biden government has decided to lift the ban on Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles to attack Russia. Russia said that this means that the United States has officially been involved in the war, while the United States said that this is a reciprocal response to the participation of Korean soldiers in the Kursk War. The global media generally interpret it as an inevitable escalation of the war, and even means the arrival of the Third World War.
My opinion is quite different.
Firstly, the so-called army tactical missiles allowed by the United States for Ukraine have a range of only 300 kilometers, which is not a long-range missile at all, not even a medium range missile, but a short-range missile. Missiles with a range below 1000 kilometers are considered short-range missiles, which is common knowledge. I don’t know why the global media would unanimously refer to the short-range missiles with a range of 300 kilometers in the United States as long-range missiles or long-range missiles, almost without exception. Is this a collective dementia or intentional confusion?
Secondly, when Joe Biden’s term of office is only two months away, he suddenly scrambles to let Ukraine use missiles to attack Russia, which neither represents the United States to participate in the war, nor is it likely to lead to an escalation of the war. To understand its true meaning or intention, perhaps we can refer to Joe Biden’s hasty withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan when he took office.
Four years ago, shortly after Joe Biden took office, why the US military suddenly withdrew from Afghanistan in a hurry is still a puzzle. Withdrawing troops is not surprising, what is strange is the way of withdrawal. Why does the powerful US military have to abandon their weapons and retreat hastily? More than 300000 various weapons, including over 40000 armored and military vehicles, as well as a large number of armed helicopters, were dropped into the hands of the enemy (Taliban) who had been fighting against them for 20 years. In the history of human warfare, this is undoubtedly the most undignified and undignified retreat, and the most shameful failure.
Among numerous analyses and interpretations, a more convincing argument is that everything is due to the corruption of the US military. The 20-year war in Afghanistan has cost trillions of dollars in huge war funds, and the holes are too big. Only by performing a hasty retreat and turning the war expenses into an unaudited black hole can the US government and military industrial complex evade responsibility. The reason why this statement is convincing is that the expenses of the US military during the Afghanistan war actually included the absurd expenditure of spending $1 million to buy a sheep to improve their lives. Secondly, during the two party elections in the United States, more scandals about corruption in the US military were exposed. For example, Republican lawmakers held a small bag of screws in Congress and questioned the US Air Force Secretary why the Air Force spent $90000 to purchase a small bag of screws with a market value of several tens of dollars?
Mr. Trump recently publicly said that he would start accountability for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan after taking office. Mr. Trump also told the story of his last presidency: as a businessman, Mr. Trump was obviously sensitive to commodity prices, so he questioned some specific military procurement prices when approving military expenses. The explanation given by the Secretary of Defense is that the US military procures military equipment from the military industrial complex, always budgeting and spending directly based on the other party’s quotation, without asking about the price. Mr. Trump said that he did not believe in evil. He personally called the quartermaster procurement department to negotiate the price, and the result was that a single order was worth $1 billion. Therefore, Mr. Trump said that he would carry out large-scale adjustment and rectification of the military, and therefore appoint a TV host outside the military and military industry system as the new defense minister, so as to facilitate a big fight against the military.
Just after the news that Joe Biden decided to lift the ban on Ukrainian long-range missiles was revealed, Solos publicly tweeted his praise, but Musk publicly objected. Mr. Trump’s son also publicly reasoned that “before my father had the opportunity to create peace and save lives, these military industrial complexes were determined to let the Third World War begin, and they all became low IQ for the sake of the dollar.” Little Trump’s words were not sharp, but at least confirmed that there was a huge interest relationship between war and military industrial complexes.
Is the goal of the Joe Biden administration really to upgrade the war to the Third World War, and then let the military industrial complex make a lot of war money?
We first need to acknowledge a few basic facts.
Firstly, even if Ukraine is allowed to use missiles with a range of up to 300 kilometers, even if they are further away, can allowing Ukraine to use medium range missiles with a range of up to 1000 kilometers change the current situation of the war? In the current situation, even providing Ukraine with nuclear bombs may not change the fate of Ukraine’s failure. As early as the early stages of the war, Britain provided Ukraine with a ‘dirty bomb’, what did it change? I have told the truth many times that what Ukraine lacks the most is not weapons, but people. It is impossible to have a combat ready army that relies on capturing the elderly, weak, sick, disabled, women, and children to fight.
Secondly, neither the United States nor Europe has the ability to sustain the war, and their weapons and equipment manufacturing capabilities cannot keep up. The first ones who cannot afford a war of attrition are the United States and Europe, not Russia. The United States has been accusing China of providing assistance to Russia recently. In fact, you only need to look at the Zhuhai Airshow to know that if China really assists Russia, the war may end in the first year. Some netizens joked that they only realized after watching the Zhuhai Airshow that if China had supported Russia, everything from the British coast to Siberia would have been under Putin’s rule long ago; If China supports Iran, Israel will have to re-establish itself in the Americas; If China supports North Korea, Tokyo Television will have to broadcast the main ideology; If China had supported the Houthi armed forces, the United States may have already decommissioned aircraft carriers. Although it’s a joke, it clearly conveys the truth. The reason why the United States wants to hype up China’s aid to Russia is nothing but to find excuses for its own incompetence.
Thirdly, if the so-called long-range weapons could really change the battlefield situation, the United States would have given them a long time ago. In fact, Britain had already provided Ukraine with the “Storm Shadow” medium range missile aid as early as last year. Has anything changed?
The Hungarian Foreign Minister said, “The bellicose forces in Washington and Brussels have launched a final and desperate attack on the new reality. With the victory of the presidential candidates seeking peace in the United States and the rise of patriotic forces in Europe, a new reality has emerged. This new reality is based on the will of the people, and they made a decision in the election: Western people choose to support patriotic forces that support peace. Those bellicose politicians who were elected to step down refuse to recognize the will of the people, whether in Washington or Brussels. This is not only anti democratic, but also extremely dangerous. It seems that in the final despair, the bellicose forces are even willing to do the worst – expand the Ukrainian war to the world
This is currently the most mainstream interpretation. But I think this interpretation is actually looking for reasons for the possibility of Russia escalating the war, because whether it really escalates the war, the initiative is not in the hands of the United States, NATO, and Europe, but in the hands of Russia.
The Joe Biden administration and the interest groups it represents probably do not have such ambition or strategic vision, let alone the ability to escalate the war. They are just running errands for that little military benefit. The reason and logic behind Joe Biden’s plan to perform a farce of hasty withdrawal in Afghanistan at the beginning of his term of office is consistent with the fact that he is now rushing to perform a long-range missile aid to Ukraine before leaving office. It is certain that there are holes in the huge military expenditure. Mr. Trump may have to be more honest when he comes to power. If he can’t fill the hole, he has to increase the items that can be disbursed. The fastest consuming weapon and equipment is undoubtedly a missile worth millions or even tens of millions of dollars, which can cost billions of dollars in just one strike. Whether it is really given or not is not important, but it must first be listed as aid to Ukraine, and it is best to set up a few fireworks to show off, so that the world can see and hear the fireworks. Even if Mr. Trump really wants to track down the missiles in the future, they will disappear after shooting, won’t they?