Is NATO Eager For WWIII? Most Unlikely.

 

In today's peace settlement in Ukraine news we read an implied threat that our EU peacekeepers might just go into world-ender mode the first chance they get:

An anonymous Western official offered another option, saying the [French and UK] forces could launch direct, immediate strikes on Russian targets if a cease-fire is violated.

Wow. French and UK troops going toe-to-toe with the Rooskies? All the way up to nuclear combat? That's a hell of a prospect. 

The last time UK and other NATO troops engaged in a standoff with Russian forces was in 1999 during the Kosovo War in what has become known as the Incident at Pristina Airport:

The following morning, Sunday 13 June, [U.S. General] Clark arrived at [UK General] Jackson's HQ in Skopje. It was pointed out to Clark that the isolated Russians could not be reinforced by air and that, in light of how vital Russian support had been to get a peace agreement, antagonising them would only be counterproductive. Clark refused to accept this and continued to order that the runway be blocked, claiming to be supported by the NATO Secretary-General. 

When again directly ordered to block the runway, Jackson suggested that British tanks and armoured cars would be more suitable, in the knowledge that this would almost certainly be vetoed by the British government. Clark agreed. Jackson was ready to resign rather than follow Clark's order. The British Ministry of Defence authorised British force commander Richard Dannatt to use 4 Armoured Brigade to isolate the airfield but not to block the runways. Clark's orders were not carried out, and the United States instead requested neighbouring states not to allow Russia to use their airspace to ferry in reinforcements. Russia was forced to call off the reinforcements after Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania refused requests by Russia to use their airspace.

“I’m not going to start World War Three for you,” Newsweek reported Jackson as telling Clark. And okay, probably discretion was the better part of valor that day. 

Does anyone believe that the present day UK and French Generals are any more eager for nuclear combat than Jackson was in 1999?

Only in Zelensky's wet dreams. 

DOGE Deeds Done Dirt Cheap

 

So far DOGE has been snapping at the heels of us feds, coming for probationary employees and the more easily intimidated of the geezers who were on the verge of retirement anyway. (The dismantling of USAID was an exception to this rule.)

But the rumors today are that the Trump Administration is planning a second Reduction In Force pass aimed at tenured employees. That will largely depend on the reorganization plans that all departments are to file by the middle of next month. The TechyBoyz of DOGE will scrub those plans on high alert for signs of redundancy or duplicated efforts, even among those functions which have a statutory basis. 

But exactly how good are those Boyz? They've stepped on their dicks a few times already, you know. 

They sent that What Did You Do Last Week email to legislative and judicial employees, as well as the intended targets in the executive branch of government. Apparently they need to ask Grok to read the Constitution for them and explain that thing called "separation of powers."

They also made the rookie mistake of not considering out-of-office and automatic replies to that omnibus Reply to This if You Want to Retire Now email. What do you suppose that some people who do not want to retire now have been receiving a welcome to the deferred retirement program anyway based on their auto replies. Ooops.

And those are just minor mistakes compared to the absurdity of the premise that someone, somewhere, was going to read 2.4 million emails, or even scan them for key words. That's not going to happen.

Maybe the TechyBoyz have some super-tricky algorithm that will do that DOGE work for them? They better hope people will believe they do, otherwise they're just IT guys in tee shirts.  

I say, take heart, and don't give in to exaggerated fears. But also update that resume and, if the worst comes, remember that the world always needs substitute teachers. 

He's So Sly, There's No Telling Where the Money Went

 

Imagine that's Zelenskyy upfront, only wearing a suit, and a pack of lovely Ukrainian women behind him dancing. 

There! Just the thing to tip U.S. public opinion over to support endless taxpayer's money flowing to Ukrainian interests with no audit.   

How can it be political? 

I'll compromise my principle (yeah, yeah) 

Ukrain-y love is mythical 

The cost is so untypical! 

It's a craze you'd underight 

Just don't audit that big fight 

You're obliged to comply 

Or else Putin's missiles fly 

It used to look good to me 

But now I find it - - -

Simply can't be audited!

Simply can't be audited!

 

Madame Ambassador Markarova, It Must Be Five O'Clock Somewhere

Don’t look so down, it’ll be Wheels Up in no time. https://t.co/OKVter0eRW

— TSB (@TweetingTSB) February 28, 2025

Stick a Fork in It, the Retirement Buyout Offer is Over

According to The Hill, 75,000 of us feds accepted the deferred retirement offer (here), and we can trust The Hill to be accurate and unbiased about that since it's probably been state-supported media all along.

The figure — 3.75 percent of the nation’s 2 million federal employees — falls short of the projected 5 percent to 10 percent of federal employees the White House expected to take the deal.

Add to that the normal annual attrition of federal employees, which IIRC is just under six percent, and you almost get to the ten percent reduction target by the end of the fiscal year. 

Fans of statistics will object that we aren't correcting those numbers for what proportion of feds were not allowed to take the offer, etc., which if we did, might make that 3.75 number larger. But those guys have probably been laid off by now, so ignore that quibbling. 

As for the other 96.25 percent of us, many were scrambling this past week to document the statutory authority which justifies their function. Frankly, though, crying you will respect muh authoritah! is a thin reed to cling to when the Reduction in Force winds begin to blow. Some of those functions just plain do not align with current administration policies. Some are directly opposed to those policies. 

"Elections have consequences" as another POTUS famously said, and we will see those consequences played out in the next few months.

It may be some comfort to recall that this is not the first time a POTUS has taken an ax to government staffing.

Trump Admin Springs US Citizen Prisoner From Russia

13 years early on his 14 year sentence. https://t.co/a81wtExvia

— TSB (@TweetingTSB) February 11, 2025

Mr. Fogel is breathing the sweet air of freedom tonight, plus all the weed he wants.  

Disaster Assistance Response Team Employee Misses Opportunity To Make the Case For USAID Funding

An American aid worker describes the implosion of the humanitarian mission to support rape and famine victims in Sudanhttps://t.co/EMzWQT89ti

— Rolling Stone Politics (@RSPolitics) February 7, 2025

DART is a small and specialized part of what USAID does, and it represents the agency's most politically defendable and humanitarian mission. The Rolling Stone story is worth the four minutes it will take you to read. 

Here are the first two paras of a transcribed chat:

What is your role with USAID? I work on the Disaster Assistance Response Team for the Sudan Complex Emergency, [funding] partners like WFP, UNICEF, and other international NGOs. I work with impressive, dedicated, honest people who want the same thing: to help alleviate suffering from the most vulnerable. We just found out we have all been terminated; for me, in less than 30 days.

What does that mean for your work? Though we were treated poorly during this, we aren't the real casualties of this political war. The programs we delivered saved lives by providing food and nutrition to SAM (severe acute malnutrition) children, and clean water and health needs for women in Sudan who were raped or impregnated by soldiers and gangs. All down the drain. We have abandoned all of it, as of now. Our NGO partners have laid people off and aid is no longer getting to those most vulnerable. It's a horrible feeling to let all that go. I feel empty and angry, sad, unvalued, confused. It hurts.

You get the sense of it from that snippit. I won't dispute anything the DART guy said. But I will point out that DART delivers all that humanitarian aid by funding its implementing partners - those NGOs and UN programs - who are the parties actually delivering the assistance. 

That being the case, does USAID need much of a field presence other than to audit contract compliance? Probably not. 

And could that necessary presence be provided just as well by DOS instead of USAID? Probably so. 

But notwithstanding all of that, what annoys me about this media piece in defense of USAID is its complete one-sidedness. No mention of the money spent on totally non-humanitarian programs, especially on funding news and opinion media outlets both at home and around the world, which is what brought USAID down. 

The humanitarian mission has public support. Funding the BBC and Politico does not. 

The interviewee and his co-workers could have improved the public perception of USAID's value by objecting to the millions USAID spent on buying media influence and other 'soft power' whim-wham rather than on his starving Sudanese. You know, be whistleblowers instead of whiners.  

That would have been an attractive proposition for MAGA and The Trumpening, I'd bet. But it's an opportunity lost, and from the looks of it, permanently.