MUST-READ Abridged Excerpts From Interview of Ted Postol, Professor Emeritus, MIT, with Robert Scheer

Photo from Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Gist: From the ‘Best and Brightest’ to a ‘Bunch of Ignorant Punks’

For more, see https://raymcgovern.com/2022/03/26/cold-reality-vs-nonchalant-talk-of-using-little-nukes/

Postol: “My grave concern is I know some of these characters who worked for Obama, and who now work for Biden. And I’m sorry to say it—I know it will be considered arrogant to say this—but they are ignorant. Let me be very clear: this is not an accidental statement on my part. They are outright ignorant. And they’re a bunch of—you know, they trained at these elite schools; they don’t know anything, but they think they know things.

I have taught at Stanford; I have taught at MIT; I have taught at Princeton and at Harvard. So I know what a lot of these people are, because they are very privileged—this is of course a generalization; there are certainly some extremely intelligent and thoughtful people among these. But a great bulk of these people are just completely in love with themselves; they are convinced that they know a lot more than they do; they will not listen, they’re not interested in learning—I mean, you try to present facts to them, they sort of walk away from you laughing.

And they are not experts. And it’s not a problem—it’s no problem at all that they are not experts. The problem is that they’re not interested in learning. So, you know, I had this character, a guy named Colin Kahl, he’s the deputy assistant secretary now for policy at the Pentagon. He doesn’t know anything. He was at Stanford, they made him a co-director of the center there. Rude beyond belief. And you know, he tells me at one point, I’m trying to discuss something with him—discuss something—he turns around and he says, I’ve got a job, I’ve got a real job, I don’t have time for this. This is a guy who’s at the Department of Defense, top levels now, possibly advising Biden.

This is the danger. And if we look at the Obama administration, we saw similar dangers. There’s a very interesting Atlantic Monthly article written by a guy named Ben Rhodes. Rhodes was the national security advisor for communications in the White House, and he wrote a totally fraudulent, supposedly government intelligence report that was released to the public about the nerve agent attack that occurred in Damascus in August of 2013.

And it’s very interesting; I would suggest your readers go read that Atlantic Monthly article. Because in his attempt to show everybody what a smart guy he is, he’s revealing that his main objective with Obama, with the president, was to get him to make a decision which would have been a disaster for the United States, but he [Rhodes] didn’t know it. But to attack Syria, before the public outrage from the misinformation people had about that nerve agent attack died down. In other words, he didn’t want the public outrage to die down before he forced or tricked or got Obama to make a momentous decision that would have been a disaster for the United States. A total disaster. [Ironically, it was Russian President Putin who pulled Obama’s chestnuts out of that fire.]

So Rhodes is bragging about in this article about the role he played. That’s a real window that people ought to use to look into the mindset of an individual who basically, through privilege and accident [check out Collegiate School in Manhattan, where he spent his formative years], became a national security advisor with no real knowledge of what’s going on.

So we’re in a dangerous situation. We have a lot of—I’m sorry, because I’m so disturbed by this—we have a bunch of punks, you know, 30-year-old punks who come from privileged backgrounds, claiming they’re experts in policy when they actually do not have the basic knowledge. And they’re advising presidents. And this is not a good professional system. we need to do something about it.

We Will All Be Dead

With respect to why nuclear weapons cannot be used is this: if we use them, we will all die. It’s that simple. And I can explain in much more detail why what I just said is correct. So if they ask the question again, why can’t we use these weapons, the simple answer is: if we do, we are all dead. … These weapons start getting used, and before you know it, it escalates into thousands of weapons being used. It’s just inevitable. It’s inevitable that the catastrophe will not be stoppable. So that is why you really ought to be very afraid that nuclear weapons will be used at a ‘low level’.

The argument about using small nuclear weapons is equivalent to saying, if I create only a small spark in this room that’s filled with gasoline vapors, it won’t be a problem. I think this is not a bad analogy. It’s physics rather than social, but it’s basically the situation. You can’t have a small spark in a room that’s filled with gasoline fumes. It’s not going to be a good outcome.”

END OF EXCERPTS from Robert Scheer Interview of Ted Postol

Note: Professors Postol and John Mearsheimer are from Brooklyn; Robert Scheer and I are from the Bronx. None of us had even heard of the Collegiate School in Manhattan, and could not have afforded to go there in the first place.

As for me, I can still hear the admonition of my Irish grandmother, a seamstress in the employ of a wealthy socialite (and thus able to avoid the infamous Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire), as I went off at age 14 to caddy at a “exclusive” Golf Club. 

“Do you know what the ‘upper crust’ is, Raymond?”

I think I do, Grandma.

“No you don’t at all! Sit ye down, then; I’ll tell ye, because you surely need to know this, going off, as you are, to caddy at that fancy golf course.

The ‘upper crust’ is a bunch of crumbs held together by a lot of dough.”

Biden Calls Openly For Removal of Putin

By Ray McGovern

Feeling his oats after receiving effusive adulation from the leaders of NATO — and of Japan at the G-7 summit — Biden provided the Mother of All Faux Pax this afternoon in Poland. (No, sadly, it was not some kind of Polish joke.)

Echoing imperious King Henry II of England, Biden uttered the equivalent of “Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest” … or troublesome president? The priest, of course, was Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury.  The president is Vladimir Putin, who had already warned of a complete break in Russia-U.S. relations.

Referring to President Putin, Biden said, “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/26/russia-ukraine-war-news-putin-live-updates/?

Here’s a reminder that should not be necessary: For a host of good reasons, prudent presidents have shied away from saying such extreme things of foreign leaders — sometimes even when the two are at war. In Poland with Ukrainian refugees, Biden was asked what he thought of Putin; he replied: “He’s a butcher.” So add “butcher” to “killer”, “war criminal”, “murderous dictator”, “pure thug”.

Nor do I need to point out that by calling today for Putin’s removal from power, Biden has erected another an extremely high obstacle to the mutual cooperation necessary to arrange an early ceasefire in Ukraine, followed by the kind of negotiations that will be necessary to bring a durable end to what is now a proxy war between Russia and the West, with the Ukrainians as pawns of history — like the Kurds.

It seems unconscionable to hold out the prospect that Putin will be removed from the scene, if the Ukrainians just hold on. Is it all the same to Biden that the carnage continue, with rhetorical promises of support for outgunned Kyiv, weapons that are blown up as soon as they cross the border into Ukraine, faith-based predictions, and crocodile tears?

This will not end well. Among other things, it amounts to public confirmation, at the chief-of-state level, no less, that a cornerstone aim of U.S. involvement in Ukraine (particularly since the U.S.-arranged coup d’etat on Feb. 22, 2014) has been “regime change” in Russia.

That coup has been accurately labeled “the most blatant coup in history”. The main orchestrator, who was caught on tape arranging for the overthrow of the popularly elected Ukrainian president and picking his successor — while arranging to have then-Vice President Biden to come in and help seal the deal, was Victoria Nuland — now number three at the State Department. It is no secret that Nuland gives here nominal boss Tony Blinken instruction on what to say and do on Ukraine.) See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeeqooNWO48

Coup No Surprise: Neither Was Russia’s Reaction

After Nuland openly bragged in Dec. 2013 of the U.S. having invested $5 Billion in Ukraine’s aspirations to join the West, and then orchestrated the coup two months later, one agency of the U.S. intelligence community, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) got it right, presaging what slipped out of Biden’s lips earlier today. In an annual “National Security Strategy” report mandated by Congress, DIA Director LT Gen Vincent Stewart on Dec. 2015 signed off on the following text:

“The Kremlin is convinced the United States is laying the groundwork for regime change in Russia, a conviction further reinforced by the events in Ukraine. Moscow views the United States as the critical driver behind the crisis in Ukraine and believes that the overthrow of former Ukrainian President Yanukovych is the latest move in a long-established pattern of U.S.-orchestrated regime change efforts.”

For some reason, the mainstream media gave no play to that key finding. Let’s see how they play Biden’s confirmation of it.

Cold Reality Vs Nonchalant Talk of ‘Using Little Nukes’

What You Really Need to Know About the Threat of Nuclear War

By Ray McGovern, March 26, 2022

Robert Scheer has done us all a service by interviewing MIT Professor Emeritus and former senior Pentagon adviser, Ted Postol, on how vulnerable human life is at this point to extinction by nuclear weapons.  There is quite enough blame to go around; it is a devil’s brew of hubris and ignorance. ( See:

https://scheerpost.com/2022/03/25/ted-postol-what-you-really-need-to-know-about-the-threat-of-nuclear-war/ )

PARENTAL ADVISORY

In my view, this is a must for ADULTS to take in; but it will be too much for CHILDREN; and only very mature ADOLESCENTS will be able to “handle the truth”. But please do forward, however, to anyone advising President Joe Biden — whichever of the above categories they happen to fit into.

Extra Credit

1 — Here is Professor Postol, with Cynthia Lazaroff and Joe Cirincione, addressing the same issues at a recent salon sponsored by the Committee For the Republic on March 17. ( See: “Is Ukraine Our Armageddon”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Quju5qY91Xk&t=31s

2 — My gist of Postol’s remarks on that occasion appears in “Will Humans Be the Next ‘Freedom Fries’?” ( See: https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2022/03/23/will-humans-be-the-next-freedom-fries/

Scott Ritter & Ray on Same Page on Ukraine

(Both Were Hosted on The Critical Hour, March 18)

By Ray McGovern

Yesterday’s colloquy between Scott and me began with strong endorsement of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin clear “NO” to proposals for a “No-Fly-Zone-Light” over Ukraine. Scott spells out in some detail what all that would mean.

What are the chances of a false-flag chemical weapon attack blaming Russia?  Was Blinken into a smoke-and-mirrors routine Wednesday, when he warned:

“We believe that Moscow may be setting the stage to use a chemical weapon and then falsely blame Ukraine to justify escalating its attacks.”

Worthy of note here, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu issued an extraordinarily specific warning of what may be in store — and who Moscow might believe responsible — in a major speech on Dec. 21:

The presence of over 120 members of US private military companies in Avdeyevka and Priazovskoye, Donetsk Region, has been proved reliably. They are setting up firing positions in residential houses and social facilities and are preparing the Ukrainian special operations forces and far-right armed groups for active hostilities. Unidentified chemical warfare agents have been delivered to Avdeyevka and Krasny Liman for the purpose of provocations. … [Emphasis in bold added.]

Scott puts in context the revelations regarding what Victoria Nuland (who herself shares a lot of the responsibility for the crisis in Ukraine) called “Biological Research Facilities”. “This stinks to high heaven”, says Scott — and it surely does.

Last, but hardly least, China was discussed while the Chinese were giving their official readout from the telephone call yesterday that Biden had requested. Was Biden told he could use personal diplomacy to drive a wedge between China and Russia?! Or was this simply a cynical attempt by Blinken and fellow geniuses to tar China with the brush used for Russian invaders? Or both?

Sorry, Tony; that horse galloped out of the barn a year ago. Remember? The arrogantly naive “exceptional” attitude you and Jake Sullivan showed your Chinese counterparts in Anchorage a year ago could not have better designed to put them off? Whether this was intentional or just dumb doesn’t matter at this point. The Chinese still consider you “not qualified” to talk to them that way — or to prod President Biden to do the same.

While Scott and I were talking, the NY Times swallowed hard and issued this initial report of the Chinese readout:

  • According to a readout of the phone call between Mr. Biden and Mr. Xi released by Chinese state media, the Chinese leader expressed opposition to the broad sanctions imposed on Russia, warning they could trigger crises in the global economy. He referenced a Chinese saying, “Let he who tied the bell on the tiger take it off,” an idiom that he has used before to convey that the responsibility for solving a problem should fall on the person who created it. In the call, Mr. Xi did not suggest that China could play a role in ending the war. 

Finally, Scott expressed the view that, although the Russians have faced unexpectedly strong opposition from a Ukrainian army now trained and led by NATO standards, Russian victory on the ground is inevitable. 

Biden Is Not Fully In Charge

(Interview on The Critical Hour, March 17)

By Ray McGovern

Who’s running the show in Washington on Ukraine? Why was Zelensky invited before Congress to appeal for the kind of help President Joe Biden had already ruled out, lest it lead to war with Russia? And why was Biden told to tell that reporter Putin is a “war criminal”?

Are the neocons getting desperate? The outlines of a deal to stop the fighting are already visible, including neutrality for Ukraine and no NATO membership. These need to be put down in writing. Other hurdles (Crimea, Donets, Lugansk) are not insuperable. First and foremost, a ceasefire is needed.

Instead of encouraging Zelensky to make a deal, the Victoria Nulands of this world (and her proteges like Gilbert and Sullivan — sorry, I mean Blinken (who writes the script) and Sullivan (who composes the music) are taking advantage of Zelensky’s formidable acting abilities, with the inevitable result that thousands more Ukrainians will die/be wounded unless a ceasefire comes soon.

The U.S. learned a bitter lesson from the Hungarian revolution in 1956, when Radio Free Europe encouraged unarmed Hungarians to fight off Soviet tanks (hinting that the U.S. would help) — in other words, encouraged them to fight till the last Hungarian. When the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia in August 1968, my duties in Germany included liaison with Radio Free Europe to which I passed along guidance from Washington.

RFE management, although highly sympathetic to the Czechs and Slovaks, carefully avoided the kind of incendiary rhetoric used in 1956, thus sparing countless Czechs and Slovaks from becoming dead Davids before the tanks of the Goliath named Brezhnev.

I have not had time to closely monitor what kind of message RFE is giving Ukrainians these days but — not surprisingly — with RFE’s meretricious emphasis on Russia’s “unprovoked” invasion, I think it is a safe bet we are back to the example of 1956, this time fighting till the last Ukrainian.

We also touched on the role of the neo-Nazi Azov brigade; also the important role of China.

Please stay tuned for our next posting — Scott Ritter and I on The Critical Hour yesterday.

Sorry, Kids; It’s About the Money

By Ray McGovern, March 12, 2022

Toward the end of a March 8 interview on The Critical Hour, I opted to address an important issue that has not been given the attention it deserves; namely, the reality that the pervasive attention given to the violence in Ukraine carries a huge “Opportunity Cost”.

Economists use the term to refer to missed opportunities — like earmarking millions of dollars for don’t-care weapons, when the dollars could be used for health-care or day-care — what Dr. King called “programs of social uplift”. Recall that a year before he was murdered, King warned that “a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death”.

The Mother of All Opportunity Costs 

Spiritual death is bad enough. What about physical death? Most human beings would deplore any agonizing physical death — by starvation, for example. And most humans care about what’s in store for children and grandchildren. An exceedingly selfish minority may care only about THEIR children and grandchildren. Sorry, folks; on climate change we are all in this together — that is, unless you are above 70 and don’t give a rat’s patootie about ANY children.

By the “Mother of All Opportunity Costs” I refer, of course, to the abject failure of us adults to stave off or even substantially attenuate the faster-than-anyone-expected doom of global warming, while we go on blithely filling the pockets of war profiteers with our taxes.  That’s what ALL coming generations (including the one-percenters who live in gated communities) are doomed to experience, if we continue to let our attention be focused almost exclusively on things like the East-West power struggle centering on Ukraine. (This assumes that nuclear war/nuclear winter, by design or miscalculation, does not come first.)

Lightening Flashes of Trust

The day of my interview with The Critical Hour (March 8) happened to be the day on which the Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines, presented the intelligence community’s annual threat briefing.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2022-Unclassified-Report.pdf

Fresh in my mind was the priority attention she sensibly gave to the existential issue of climate change a year ago. Several days after she oversaw last year’s threat briefing, Haines showed she was capable of broader thinking. Here’s what she said in a major speech on April 22:

“Climate change knows no boundaries, respects no national borders, and cannot be addressed by any one nation on its own. We must work together on the challenge before us. … working with my colleagues across every department and agency in the United States, including state, local and tribal authorities, we intend to make this a whole-of-government effort – working not just to protect American national security but to protect human security around the world.”

The following day, eager for the slightest sign that some senior official had her/his head screwed on right, I sent this tweet:

Sadly, even if Haines had the courage of her convictions and brought her concerns to the White House, there is virtually no chance they would have any impact on Pentagon decisions. The Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank (MICIMATT) complex rules.

This Year

This year we saw no such outspokenness from National Intelligence Director Haines or her minions. The 2022 threat briefing relegates this quintessential issue to page 21 (of 30), on which this tepid “insight” sums things up:

“The combination of environmental degradation, rising temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and other climate effects is likely to lead to an array of human challenges such as food and water insecurity and threats to human health.”

Pope Francis Gives It a Try

Most Popes are reluctant to call a spade a spade. Pope Francis is different. But, alas, to quote Josef Stalin’s famous question — “How many divisions does the Pope have?” — the answer is fewer even than Avril Haines has. (Besides, the Vatican is often excellent with rhetoric, but woefully deficient in getting the faithful to implement it.)

Francis did give it his best shot in a speech before both houses of Congress on Sept. 24, 2015, when he made bold to say:

“The main problem is the blood-soaked arms traders.”

Members of House and Senate rose as one to applaud. To those who know how the system works, the enthusiasm of those congress-people, who profiteer on tension and war, was giving hypocrisy itself a bad name. In my mind’s eye, I could see them checking their pockets to make sure the most recent checks from Lockheed and Raytheon had not slipped out with all the clapping.  It was the “C” in MICIMATT on display. 

Add a Lack of Trust to Avarice

If we are to meet the challenge of climate change identified by Director Haines, it cannot be addressed by any one nation on its own. As she noted, “we must work together not just to protect American national security but to protect human security around the world.” The sad news today is this requires a modicum of trust.

After the Biden-Putin summit in last June I wrote a piece entitled “Will the MICIMATT Douse ‘Lightening Flashes of Trust’?”  (See: https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2021/06/18/will-the-micimatt-douse-lightening-flashes-of-trust/ and https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2021/06/16/trust-lacking-at-blah-summit/ )

It was a given that the MICIMATT would do all it could to thwart anything that might jeopardize its ability to profiteer on tension and war.  But what about the “lightening flashes of trust”?

At Putin’s press conference immediately following the June 16 summit, he was asked if he had reached “a new level of trust with the U.S. president”. In answer, Putin quoted Leo Tolstoy:

“Tolstoy once said, there is no happiness in life, only lightening flashes (зарницы) of it — cherish them. I believe that in this situation some kind of family trust is not possible. However, it seems to me we have seen “lightening flashes” of it (“зарницы” промелькнули).

Two weeks earlier, Putin had pointed to the political pressures any U.S. president faces in trying to carve out a less acrimonious relationship with Russia. He asserted that “to a certain extent, Russian-American relations have become hostage to internal political processes in the United States itself.” (Emphasis added.)

Putin added:

“I hope it ends someday. I mean the fundamental interests in the field of at least security, strategic stability and the reduction of weapons dangerous for the whole world are still more important than the current domestic political situation in the United States itself.”

Trust is Gone; Are Chemicals Ahead?

Clearly, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the economic sanctions imposed on it have begun a new chapter in East-West relations (with its most significant feature so far being China’s support for Putin). We now should report signs of the worst — from both sides — if only in an asttempt to head it off.

Gilbert Doctorow, and astute analyst of Russia, warned on his blog today that it is “highly likely” the United States is about to carry out a ‘false flag’ operation in Ukraine in which it will accuse the Russians of using chemical weapons. (See: 
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2022/03/13/false-flag-chemical-attack-in-ukraine-a-coming-attraction/ ). This, of course, is a terrifying prospect, but Establishment media in the West do seem to be laying the groundwork for it.

At the UN this week, not all were convinced — notably China — by the U.S. delegate’s attempt to rebut Russian claims of more nefarious activities at the “biological research facilities” in Ukraine mentioned by Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland Tuesday. What better way to detract attention from those labs, and in the process perhaps even thwart any investigation of the evidence Moscow says is possesses?  With Establishment media buy-in (a given) the diversion would be a slam dunk, so to speak.

And so, if you hear reports of a Russian chemical attack in or near Ukraine, well, kick the tires.

Of interest in this regard is the unusually detailed warning/prediction that Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu included in his formal State of the Armed Forces speech to Putin and senior generals/admirals on Dec. 21, 2021 (See: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67402 )

“ … The presence of over 120 members of US private military companies in Avdeyevka and Priazovskoye, Donetsk Region, has been proved reliably. They are setting up firing positions in residential houses and social facilities and are preparing the Ukrainian special operations forces and far-right armed groups for active hostilities. Unidentified chemical warfare agents have been delivered to Avdeyevka and Krasny Liman for the purpose of provocations. …” [Emphasis added.]

Fasten your seatbelts.