Thoughts for the Day, March 16, 2022: A speech that was moving in its simplicity.

President Zelensky made his plea for more support to the U.S. Congress today in a speech that was moving in its simplicity.  President Zelensky reminded Congress how the U.S felt on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001, when we were attacked without provocation.  President Zelensky says he appreciates all the support the U.S has given to date, but he needs more.  He understands concerns about implementing a no-fly zone so as an alternative he asked for more air defense systems as well as more planes.  He referenced MLK when he said, “I have a dream. These words are known to each of you today. I can say I have a need. I need to protect our sky. I need your decision.” His speech was finalized with a video of Ukraine weeks before the invasion and following the invasion with all the death and destruction. It was clearly a speech from the heart of a man that is showing great courage and leadership in a time of need.

Following the speech President Biden said on Wednesday that the United States would send $800 million in additional military assistance to Ukraine.  It is not clear what is included in the package.

The sending of planes or enforcing a no-fly zone is a major decision that needs serious thought and discussion prior to acting.  As indicated by the comments below from four U.S. House Representatives from Michigan, coming to a consensus is not going to be easy, especially when the stakes are so high.

Representative Peter Meijer, an Army veteran who served in Afghanistan, said, “A no-fly zone would in effect put U.S. or NATO forces in a position of killing or being killed by Russian forces. It may come a time where that ends up being the case. I think we are very far from it. But we have to be honest about what it represents.”

U.S. Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph, argued Wednesday, “Why not? What’s the difference between passing through some of the Polish jets, so they can establish this no-fly zone, especially since we’re in the fourth week of this?  Instead of telling the Russians what not to do, we should give (Ukraine) some of the tools they need, so they’re not fighting with one hand behind their back.”

U.S Rep Andy Levin said, “I personally am in favor of neighboring countries giving them aircraft that they could use, and they know how to fly MiGs. But they have MiGs right now that they’re not using completely. It certainly doesn’t make sense for Poland to formally give NATO planes and then NATO flying them into Ukraine. It doesn’t make any sense in terms of avoiding a war between nuclear powers, or between NATO and Russia — like World War III.” 

Rep. Elissa Slotkin of Holly, a former defense official who also sits on Armed Services, acknowledged the reticence to green light the aircraft swap, but she supports providing the planes. “I know that people are concerned about escalation, but I’m listening to Zelensky and the thing that he really asked us for was more help with the skies. I think that being too cautious at this moment doesn’t make any sense because Putin already made the decision to invade.”” Slotkin also wants to provide an even wider range of offensive weapons systems. 

In response to my blog earlier this week, one of the readers sent me information on how much certain European countries are spending on defense as a percent of GDP as compared to the U.S.  I looked up the information and it supports my questions that I asked in my blog. Why have the European Union countries not provided stronger defenses for their respective countries?  Were the lessons of World War II quickly forgotten?  Did they forget that having a strong defense is one of the best ways to prevent war?  Did their politicians think that peace was a given and spending on national defense was not necessary?  As the saying goes, ‘Those who do not study history are destined to repeat it.”

 In my research I found that NATO has a goal that NATO countries will spend on the average 2% of GDP on national defense.  If you exclude the U.S and the United Kingdom, the remaining countries are not close to averaging 2%. Here are examples of how some of the NATO countries are doing as of 2020. 

United States-3.72%

United Kingdon-2.29%

Spain-1.0%

Poland-2.28%

Germany-1.53%

France-2.03%

Italy-1.4%

NATO average for all countries, excluding the U.S. 1.71%

NATO average for all countries, including the U.S. 2.75

As you can see by these numbers, when it comes to providing defense for their respective countries, the NATO/European countries who are most vulnerable to an attack by Russia or China, are providing the least amount of defense spending.

On a positive note, maybe the NATO countries have seen the errors of their ways. NATO defense ministers directed military commanders to draw up detailed plans to reinforce deterrence in the alliance’s eastern flank. The alliance’s secretary general Stoltenberg said, “our new posture should include substantially more forces in the eastern part of the alliance, at higher readiness.  On land, our new posture should include substantially more forces in the eastern part of the alliance, at higher readiness, with more prepositioned equipment and supplies,” Mr. Stoltenberg said there also must be enhanced air support, air defenses and naval presence to “reset deterrence.”

It was good to see Mayor Ivan Fyodorov, 33 of Militopol, who was dragged from his office with a bag over his head last week by Russian troops, was freed after days without word of his condition.

Pray for peace. What are you doing to stop the violence?  Get vaccinated and get your booster.

Orchid of the Day: President Zelensky-a leader with courage and compassion.

Onion of .the Day:  The Russian military leaders who kidnapped Mayor Ivan Fyodorov.

Quote of the Day: “Being the leader of the world, means being the leader of peace.” President Zelensky addressing the U.S. Congress today.

Video of the Day: President Zelensky speaking to the U.S. Congress today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyQRAYFGKeQ