(Continued from Part 1.)
Defense Production Act
The Defense Production Act was passed in 1950. It is an important piece of legislation that we should all know about. Why? Before the bombing of Pearl Harbor part of Congress (GOP) was advocating an isolationist stance regarding the war in Europe. Since Congress controls the budget, it made providing military aid to our Allies extremely hard. The Defense Production Act aimed at making it easier for a U.S. president to prepare the U.S. for war without “permission” from Congress. One key part of the act is the ability of the president to make and guarantee loans to expand manufacturing of defense-related items. As an example, the president does not need to go to Congress for funding for a new explosives plant, the president could, through the act, authorize a loan and guarantee it, thus by assing Congress.
In the lead-up to World War Two, there was a lot of public debate about getting involved with the war. Congress passed a series of laws, referred to as the Neutrality Act. One could argue that by the U.S. blocking/slowing arms shipments to Allied forces (before the U.S. entered the war) we allowed the Axis forces to take more territory since our friends did not have the aid they needed to repel the Axis forces. Fast forward to Ukraine and Russia today and this is one reason why the U.S. and NATO are providing so much aid to Ukraine. The thought is, it is better to supply arms and ammunition to Ukraine to counter the Russians in Ukraine, than to allow Russia to roll through Ukraine and onto the Baltic States which are NATO members.
Seeing the U.S. government “nationalize” businesses, especially defense-related industries is another prelude to war. Recently, the U.S. government has taken a stake in Nvidia, AMD, MP Materials, and U.S. Steel. All these companies play a major role in the U.S. defense sector. We will not see press conferences or speeches read in the Rose Garden about implementing sections of the National Defense Act but preppers should watch for more defense industries/contractors to be nationalized or stakes taken by the federal government.
Defense Industrial Reserve
Another program that has been instituted to bypass an isolationist Congress is the Defense Industrial Reserve. This program authorizes the Secretary of Defense to stockpile materials, machinery and facilities. Facilities like the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant and Scranton Army Ammunition Plant have recently “boosted” production. The Department of Defense, under the Defense Industrial Reserve Program, can keep whole production lines packed away until needed.
One of the issues during World War Two was the time it took to bring new war factories on-line. First, the machinery needed built and/or acquired then buildings built and people hired and trained to use the machines. By already having the machines and facilities on hand it would greatly speed up the time needed to expand war production. One of the sites I check time to time is the Department of Defense/war website that publicly list new federal contracts awards for the DOD. Reading the contract awards are somewhat like reading hieroglyphics but if you understand the defense industrial reserve you may spot contracts to companies that are hired to take these reserve production lines out of mothballs and set up. I have seen two such contracts, one was for an ammunition production line and another for ship-building. No action by Congress is needed to activate production lines that are part of the Defense Industrial Reserve. Through provisions of the National Defense Act, implementation is kept out of the general public’s eye.
The Arsenal of Democracy or Magnet for War
In both of the 20th Century world wars, the United States provided massive amounts of arms and ammunition to our Allies. Since 2021, an estimated $67 Billion in military aid has been provided to Ukraine by the U.S.. When you add that $67 Billion in aid to Ukraine with what NATO has provided Ukraine in the same time period, it is a staggering $187 Billion. All this aid going to a nation that is smaller in land area than Texas. It should not be surprising that Putin, like Hitler, has declared military aid to Ukraine as an act of war.
During World War One, Germany engaged in “unrestrictive submarine warfare” targeting ships carrying military aid from the U.S. to Britain and France. Is it possible that we could see Russia target ships carrying aid to Ukraine? Recently, two oil tankers from the Russian “ghost fleet” blew up. Does Russia retaliate by striking civilian shipping into Ukraine? In both World Wars the U.S. providing military aid was a major driving force that led to active U.S. involvement. Why would our providing arms to another European war have a different outcome?
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
Also during World War One, Germany coordinated with Mexico on a deal that would see Germany assist Mexico in regaining Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, if the United States entered the war. The goal was to distract the U.S. by having to defend its southern states so that the U.S. would not send troops and aid to Europe. This deal was discovered in what is known as the Zimmerman Telegram.
As the U.S. supports Ukraine, will Russia work with our adversaries to try and distract us? Perhaps the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean is more than about taking out a few boats loaded with drugs? Russia and Venezuela do have a military agreement but it currently does not require Russia to intervene if Venezuela is attacked.
During the Cold War, now Russian President Putin was a KGB agent who reportedly coordinated with and supplied the Red Army Faction, a leftist terror group with weapons and funds. The goal was to sow dissent and destabilize the Western governments. It takes little imagination to think that Putin will do the same here in the United States. Given our current domestic political turmoil, it does not take much to exploit the current situation. During the Cold War an estimated $600 million dollars was provided to anti-nuclear “peace” groups by the Soviet Union. There has been much speculation about where leftist groups such as ANTIFA get their funding. It should be known that although another “ANTIFA” was an anti-fascist organization in the 1930s, many, if not most, of ANTIFA was made up of assorted left-wing (communist/socialist) organizations and members.
During the Cold War it was reported that $600 million from the Soviets was dispersed through well-established “peace” organizations. One could easily surmise that Russia could fund organizations within the United States to foment dissent. In 2020, during the “Mostly Peaceful” protest, several jurisdictions reported “pallets of bricks being located near the rioting. During one of our local protest I was monitoring local police encrypted communications (as part of my job) and listened to the local police discuss protesters getting brinks from a pallet. There was no construction in that area at the time so it was very interesting to hear about other mysterious pallets of bricks at other protest locations. Besides funding protesters, Russia has also paid for political ads, not to sway an election necessarily but rather to cause more political dissension amongst Americans. As President Lincoln said, “a house divided cannot stand.”
Win their hearts and minds
When all the mainstream news organizations start to back military action by the U.S., then look out. As our nation prepares for war, we citizens will be the targets of a massive propaganda campaign. A nation at war, without the backing of the war by its citizens, will be in dire straits.
During the Civil War there were violent draft riots. These riots had to be stopped by federal troops. There is little doubt that our adversaries will use propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation to foment dissent. In the age of AI, discerning the “truth” will become harder and harder. We already see ANTIFA soldiers in the streets doing the bidding of those who wish to see America fall. Remember, the goal of our adversaries is to sow dissent amongst ourselves. Considering how divided we are now politically, socially, and economically, our adversaries will try to exploit any talk of a second civil war.
Escalation Versus Deescalation
As we hear geopolitical news, we need to ask ourselves are tensions escalating or are they deescalating? One could argue that World War Two started when Germany left the League of Nations in the Fall of 1933 or perhaps in March of 1936 when Germany sent troops into the demilitarized zone known as the Rhineland (between Germany and France). As we can see, Putin’s and NATO’s actions are certainly rhyming somewhat with those leading up to World War Two. If we see a pattern of sustained escalation with little to no deescalation coupled with the previous topics discussed, we need to ask ourselves: “Is war is upon us?” Peace talks are great, but if they are not producing anything, it is just that, “talk”. The Korean War took two years of “peace” negotiations before there was an armistice (end of hostilities but no peace treaty). Many speculate that Russia’s peace negotiations are for show only. Would a negotiated cease-fire survive the next U.S. Presidential election?
(To be concluded tomorrow, in Part 3.)