Gaza’s next big threat: Cholera, infectious diseases amid total blockade

Humanitarian organisations warn deadly water-born diseases will spread in the besieged strip if aid is not allowed in.

Water sold by private vendors who run small solar-powered desalination facilities has doubled in price in Gaza since October 7

 [Mohammed Abed/ AFP]
By Federica Marsi
Published On 21 Oct 2023

Waseem Mushtaha’s four children have been out of school for almost two weeks. Instead of learning mathematics or geography, they are being taught how to ration water.

“Every day I fill a bottle of water for each one and I tell them: Try to manage this,” he told Al Jazeera, speaking from the southern Gaza city of Khan Younis. “At the beginning, they struggled, but now they are coping.”

KEEP READING

‘This is genocide, not war’: Gaza destruction sparks protests across world

A love story born in Gaza’s bombed Ahli Hospital

‘Free world, where are you?’ Gaza hospital chief pleads after babies killed

After Israel issued an evacuation order for 1.1 million Palestinians in the northern part of Gaza, Mushtaha drove his wife and children aged eight to 15 to his aunt’s home in Khan Younis, where residents opened their doors to extended family and friends amid Israel’s relentless aerial bombardment.

As a water and sanitation officer for global non-profit Oxfam, Mushtaha sees the markers of an impending public health catastrophe all around him. “People sleep on the streets, in shops, in mosques, in their cars or on the streets,” he said. His family lives alongside around 100 people crammed in a 200-square-metre apartment and count themselves among the lucky ones.

Meanwhile, hygiene products have disappeared from the few supermarkets that are open and water sold by private vendors who run small solar-powered desalination facilities has doubled in price since October 7 – when Israel began bombing Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack carried out by Hamas. It used to cost 30 shekels ($7.40), but is now priced at 60 shekels ($15).

On Wednesday, Mushtaha estimated that his family would run out of water in 24 hours. After that, he didn’t know what would happen. “We will go to the market and purchase whatever is available,” he explained. “We are looking to the future with bleak eyes.”

Palestinians try to buy essential goods in Khan Younis in the Gaza Strip [Fatima Shbair/AP]

Collapse of water and sanitation services

Oxfam and United Nations agencies have warned that the collapse of water and sanitation services will spark bouts of cholera and other deadly infectious diseases if urgent humanitarian aid is not delivered.

Israel cut off its water pipeline to Gaza, along with the fuel and electricity provisions that power water and sewage plants, after announcing a total blockade of the Palestinian enclave following the Hamas attack.

Most of Gaza’s 65 sewage pumping stations and all five of its wastewater treatment facilities have been forced to stop operations. According to Oxfam, untreated sewage is now being released into the sea while solid waste is also ending up on some streets alongside bodies waiting to be buried.

Desalination plants have stopped working and municipalities are unable to pump water to residential areas because of the power shortage. Some people in Gaza are relying on salty tap water from the enclave’s only aquifer, which is contaminated with sewage and seawater, or have resorted to drinking seawater. Others are being forced to drink from farm wells

.

Palestinian children search for a place to refill water in the Rafah refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip [Mohammed Abed/AFP]
‘On the streets with no protection’

The UN says that currently in Gaza only three litres of water a day is available per person to cover all their needs including drinking, washing, cooking and flushing the toilet. Between 50-100 litres of water each day is the recommended amount for a person to meet their basic health requirements, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

An employee of the charity Islamic Relief who also found shelter in Khan Younis described a similar situation. “At my parents’ house, there are around 20 children and seven adults sheltering. Even with so many people we only flush the toilet twice a day – once in the morning, once at night – to save water,” she said, requesting anonymity.

“We cook food that uses the least water. We wash for prayers just once or twice,” she added. “We have a neighbour with a well, but he doesn’t have any electricity to pump the water. They’ve got a generator but no fuel.”

For those who have no shelter, conditions are most dire. “There are families with children and newborn babies living without a roof over their heads,” she said. “They just sit on the streets without protection, water, food or anything. They don’t have any security.”

‘We are ready to go’

Fears are growing that dehydration and waterborne diseases will lead to a humanitarian catastrophe amid Israeli air strikes that have killed 4,137 Palestinians.


Humanitarian organisations have repeatedly issued calls for the aid stocked at the Rafah crossing, the sole route for aid to enter the Gaza Strip on the only border that it shares with Egypt, to be let through.

Following a visit to Israel on Wednesday, US President Joe Biden said an agreement had been reached with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow deliveries of assistance in the coming days. Israel has insisted that all trucks must be checked and that no aid must reach Hamas fighters. Biden also said Egypt had agreed to allow an initial convoy of 20 trucks with aid through the Rafah border crossing into Gaza.



Twice last week rumours of an agreement circulated, suggesting an imminent opening of the crossing that didn’t happen.

Mathew Truscott, Head of Humanitarian Policy at Oxfam, said he felt frustration at the idea that diseases could be spreading while water and medicines piled up a few kilometres across the border.

“Cholera is just one of many waterborne diseases that can be spreading – if we can get aid in, a lot of this can be prevented,” he said. “But you can’t provide humanitarian operations where there are still bombs falling.”

UN chief Antonio Guterres called on Wednesday for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza to ease the “epic human suffering”. On the same day, the US vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, supported by most other members, demanding a humanitarian pause in Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.



While the war continues, there are fears that there will be more incidents like the al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion on Tuesday. “We are very concerned for the attacks on healthcare,” Richard Brennan, regional emergency director at the WHO, told Al Jazeera.

Four out of 34 hospitals are no longer operational, according to the UN health agency, as others overflow with injured patients and families in need of shelter. “The conditions are ripe for the spread of a number of diarrhoeal and skin diseases,” Brennan said, with ripple effects to be felt in the region.

In 2022, cholera spread across Syria and Lebanon, killing at least 97 people. While an epidemic has not been registered in Palestinian territories in decades, “it’s conceivable that the bacterium has been brought in and the conditions are now ripe for its spread,” Brennan said.


For any efforts to turn the tide, “getting aid in is vital”, the WHO representative added. “The ball is in the court of the political leaders who have to elevate humanitarian needs as a priority. We are ready to go, but we have to be given unhindered, secure, protected passage to help people in need.”

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA

PESTILENCE 

A potential first-of-its-kind fighter-jet purchase could be a sign Saudi Arabia isn't happy with what it's getting from the US


Paul Iddon
Updated Mon, August 21, 2023 

Royal Saudi Air Force F-15Cs fly with US Air Force F-15Cs in June 2019.

US Navy/Handout via REUTERS

Saudi Arabia is reportedly considering a large number of French-made Dassault Rafale fighter jets.


Such a purchase would be a break from Saudi Arabia's long history of buying US and British jets.


This suggests Riyadh doesn't think its traditional partners will be as reliable in the future.

Saudi Arabia has spent decades building an enormous air force composed exclusively of advanced US and British fighter jets. But Riyadh's reported interest in potentially purchasing a large number of French jets may be a sign it doesn't think its longtime patrons are as reliable as before.

In December, France's La Tribune financial newspaper, citing unnamed sources, reported that Saudi Arabia was considering acquiring 100 to 200 Dassault Rafale fighters. The report came amid developments suggesting that the US and other nations might not provide military equipment to Riyadh in the future.

After Riyadh cut oil production in October, US lawmakers proposed legislation freezing all American arms sales to the kingdom, which could have grounded most of the Saudi air force and would further fray already strained US-Saudi relations.

In July, Germany announced it would not allow additional Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets to be delivered to Saudi Arabia. The Saudi air force has 72 Eurofighters, second only to the number of US-made F-15s it has.

Saudi Arabia's neighbors in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar have built up large fleets of Western-made jets that include dozens of Rafales. The La Tribune report, while unconfirmed, suggests political and practical concerns are pushing the Saudis toward the French jet.
French appeal

A French Dassault Rafale flying near Salon-de-Provence in May 2022.Toni Anne Barson/Getty Images

Buying more Typhoons would be "the sensible move" since the Saudis have the infrastructure to train pilots and operate that jet, "but a German block prevents that," said Sébastien Roblin, a widely published military-aviation journalist.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is "not currently inclined to throw Washington any free bones by ordering F-15EXs," and despite an "about-face" by President Joe Biden, Roblin said, the Saudis know that future jet sales "could be disrupted by domestic political revulsion for Riyadh's actions domestically or the war in Yemen."

As bin Salman pursues a detente with his main rival, Iran, and improves relations with China, opposition to such sales may only increase.

Roblin noted that France has sold armored vehicles, helicopters, artillery, air-to-ground Damocles targeting pods, and SCALP cruise missiles to Riyadh and that French political culture values having "a diversified, independent defense sector" and is therefore "much less susceptible to human-rights-based misgivings, which has enabled sustained arms sales to a wider stable of clients in the Middle East."

Saudi Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets near Riyadh in January 2017.FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP via Getty Images

Consequently, Saudi Arabia buying 100 or more Rafales would be a big "economic win" that would "score Riyadh an upgraded strategic partner outside of Washington or London," Roblin said, though he pointed out that Gulf states have a habit of hyping arms buys from new sources, including Russia or China, to elicit "jealous counteroffers from their 'main' strategic partners."

Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk-intelligence company RANE, said Rafales could be an "attractive option" to Riyadh, considering the sanctions the US and Germany imposed on it after the assassination of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

French jets are also modern and built by a NATO country, potentially reducing issues with integrating the jets with the Saudis' other Western aircraft. France's less restrictive end-user agreements "underlines this attractiveness," Bohl added.

Riyadh's non-NATO options for jets are relatively limited, and buying Russian or Chinese jets would likely incur US sanctions, which makes Saudi interest in the Rafale seem "realistic," Bohl said. "Saudi Arabia wants to diversify its air force so that if it has an interruption with one of its arm suppliers, like the United States, its air wing doesn't grind to a halt."
Shifting US-Saudi ties

President Joe Biden and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in July 2022.Bandar Algaloud/Reuters

In the near term, Saudi Arabia may find Rafales more burdensome than beneficial, given its extensive investment in US and British aircraft.

"I would be surprised if the Royal Saudi Air Force procured Rafale, given the size and well-established state of its F-15 and Typhoon fleets," Justin Bronk, an expert on airpower at the Royal United Services Institute, told Insider.

Such pragmatic concerns have kept Saudi Arabia from buying French fighters in the past. After all, Bohl said, it's much easier to build an air force with pilots who train on a single system or with systems from a single country of origin. And despite the sophistication of French military hardware, it hasn't been used in battle as much as US equipment has and therefore lacks a "combat record as a selling point" like US-made weapons, Bohl added.

Limits on the Rafale's technology and availability may also deter Riyadh.

A Saudi Air Force F-15 taxis for takeoff at King Faisal Air Base in February 2021.US Air Force/Staff Sgt. Katherine Walters

While the Rafale F4 is "one of the most advanced and versatile of the 4.5-generation fighters on the market," it is "not a true stealth fighter" with the advanced capabilities Saudi Arabia wants, Roblin said.

Even if Riyadh ordered Rafales tomorrow, they would take at least several years to arrive. "Right now, a big problem is Dassault's factory is already booked with orders for over a hundred additional aircraft for Croatia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Greece, and the United Arab Emirates," Roblin said.

The strength of US-Saudi relations has kept Riyadh firmly in the US camp for decades, but Bohl said that relationship has "fundamentally shifted" and the US is no longer "as expansive of a defense partner" as in the past, a trend that may add to the appeal of other countries' weapons.

"Under previous kings, Saudi Arabia saw the United States as a reliable protector of its security and was willing to do favors through energy policy and arms deals for Washington in exchange for this guarantee," Bohl told Insider. "That led to Riyadh being less willing to do special favors for the United States, like going to it exclusively for arms purchases."

Paul Iddon is a freelance journalist and columnist who writes about Middle East developments, military affairs, politics, and history. His articles have appeared in a variety of publications focused on the region.

Saudi Arabia sets its sights on Britain’s military jewel


Howard Mustoe
Sun, 20 August 2023 

Mohammed bin Salman is attempting to reinvent the petrodollar kingdom - /SPA/AFP via Getty Images

Oil pumps have long dotted Saudi Arabia’s desert landscape, but they could soon be joined by a raft of factories.

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman wants to turn the country into the Gulf’s manufacturing powerhouse as it moves away from oil and gas.

The heir to Saudi Arabia’s $2 trillion throne wants to increase industrial exports to $148bn (£116bn) by 2030, tripling factory numbers to 36,000 by 2035 which will churn out everything from warships to cars.


So far, he has poured investment into Lucid, a US-based electric car maker which plans to build a factory in the country, while also striking a planned joint venture with Navantia, the Spanish state-owned builder of naval vessels.

Now, he has his sights set on another lucrative, albeit expensive and notoriously complex market – fighter jets.

It was announced last week that the controversial ruler is set to visit the UK in autumn, which came after a flurry of speculation around Saudi Arabia joining one of Britain’s largest military projects.

Downing Street reportedly wants to make the Kingdom part of the £72bn Tempest programme, initially, an Anglo-Italian effort which Japan joined last year.

Saudi’s deep pockets will be welcome, but industrial insiders are concerned about the nation’s technological offering, as well as its political baggage.

The Tempest project aims to bring a sixth-generation fighter jet into service by the middle of the next decade, replacing the Eurofighter Typhoon.

Notably, Saudi reportedly wants to become a formal partner in the programme rather than simply buying the finished product as a customer, as it has with the Typhoon.

Any partnership will need large capital investment, but it will secure Saudi new local jobs and a hand in designing Tempest, delivering the technological expertise the ruler craves.

Saudi Arabia’s bid to join the Tempest fighter jet programme as an equal partner are said to have unsettled Japanese officials - David Rose

However, speculation around the state’s involvement, alongside the planned visit, has reignited concerns over the Kingdom’s human rights record and its approach to gay rights.

Homosexuality is still a criminal offence punishable by death, while the country is also involved in a years-long war in Yemen.

It will also be Mohammed bin Salman’s (MBS) first UK visit since the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was killed and dismembered on the orders of the Crown Prince, according to analysis by the CIA.

He has denied any involvement.

From a financial perspective, the huge cost of building ever more complex military hardware makes the country an attractive bet with its wealth and keen stance.

But bringing on such a controversial partner has already caused reported discomfort among Japanese officials.

Another question raised by insiders is what the country can add in terms of high-end jet design, with only a handful of countries in the world capable of building supersonic aircraft.

Under MBS, however, Saudi Arabia has supercharged its investment and ambitions in industry, technology and defence as part of the Vision 2030 programme, as the ruler aims to wean the country off oil.

“Through the national industrial strategy and in partnership with the private sector, the Kingdom will become a leading industrial powerhouse that contributes to securing global supply chains and exports high-tech products to the world,” MBS said last year.

The brutal murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018 still casts a shadow onto perceptions of the Kingdom today - MOHAMMED AL-SHAIKH / AFP

The country already has a manufacturing champion in Saudi Arabia’s Basic Industries Corporation, known as SABIC.

With prominence in the chemical sector, it also makes car parts, cosmetics ingredients and metals, bringing in $53bn in sales last year.

The country is also liberalising at pace, says Roxana Mohammadian-Molina, a former investment banker and finance technology entrepreneur, who has done business in Saudi Arabia.

“When you go there it is completely unexpected compared to the preconceived idea that people have,” she said. “It is very open. I have travelled there alone many times, you really feel very safe.

“They are very open to doing business. They are really keen to partner with other countries, particularly the UK universities that can attract talent.”

She pointed to the recent success of Tamara, a payment platform based in Riyadh which picked up a $150m loan from Goldman Sachs in March.

“Ambitions are very high. I think this is a very long process, you’re not going to become a tech hub overnight,” she says. “But the thing is in Saudi Arabia, things move very quickly.”

Liberalisation is among the changes taking place in the country, she added.

“You have big cities like Riyadh that are very advanced and progressive and have a young population, but you also have smaller cities and towns that are still very traditional, it is a fine balance for those interests.”

Women are playing a greater role in the Saudi economy as efforts to liberalise the Gulf state gather pace - FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP

Saudi Arabia is likely to employ a broad spread of investments before focusing on areas it can excel, said Ayham Kamel, head of Eurasia Group’s Middle East and North Africa research team.

“I think it requires them to have experimented with different sectors for a while before they double down,” he says. “It’s really a wide net. I would expect it to be more focused in the future, but we are not there yet.”

The country’s investments today range from stakes in Nintendo, Uber and Boeing, to Newcastle United FC and its controversial takeover of Golf’s PGA tour through its LIV Golf rival.

Saudi also wants to become a leader in artificial intelligence and is hoovering up the specialist computer chips necessary to develop an AI economy, according to recent reports

Mr Kamel says Riyadh is “ambitious to get into the high-tech industry and migrate part of the production in Saudi Arabia”, he adds.

Riyadh’s plan to increase its defence industrial knowledge is already underway.

In December, the Kingdom signed its deal with Spanish shipbuilder Navatia to form a joint venture to build warships. The final details of the deal will be ironed out next year, but the agreement allows for all of the construction to be done in Saudi shipyards.

The deal allowed the country to “localise military industry” defence minister Prince Khaled bin Salman said at the time.

UK investment chiefs are now keen to snap up more of Saudi’s income rather than see it go to rivals like Spain.

One City veteran who has experience investing in the country expressed frustration about the poor perception of Saudi Arabia in press coverage.

He said: “Saudi Arabia is changing for the good at a stunning speed and to be honest the parts of the press coverage here have been almost profligate in their jaundiced, biased reporting.

“Saudi is far more than Khashoggi. And British business is considered good business. Saudi is the UK’s primary trading partner in the Middle East and the UK is Saudi Arabia’s closest European ally.”

The country was the UK’s 10th-biggest export customer for services last year and Britain enjoys a £7bn trading surplus with Saudi.

But in the eyes of outside investors and potential customers, its human rights record must improve. The country executed 196 people last year, the highest number since Amnesty International started recording the numbers 30 years ago.

Polly Truscott, Amnesty International UK’s foreign policy adviser, said MBS “must be properly held to account for abuses by Saudi officials, including Khashoggi’s murder, the widespread use of torture in Saudi jails and the indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Yemen.”

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

SIGN THE PETITION

Edmonton mom facing deportation makes impassioned plea for her and her daughter to stay in Canada

A mother and daughter from Edmonton facing an imminent deportation order are desperate to remain in Canada.

The Cayanans are scheduled to be deported July 11, 2022 - but hope public pressure will assist them in staying in Canada long-term.

Sarah Ryan / Global News- Yesterday 

Vangie Cayanan came to Canada as a temporary foreign worker back in 2010, but she alleges her employer abused her and when she reported it, she was let go.

The next year, she moved to Edmonton where she continued to work.

In 2015, while still in Canada, Cayanan had a baby girl named McKenna. That's the same year Cayanan became an undocumented migrant.

Recently, her lawyer said the Canada Border Services Agency started rounding up undocumented workers and deporting them.

Family friend Whitney Haynes said the government isn't being fair to the Cayanans.

"She came here legally, under the temporary foreign worker program," Haynes said. "She was abused by her employer, abused by a system which has abused many people -- that throws people away back to their own country just to bring in a new batch of people to do the same jobs."

Cayanan was told she and her daughter would have to leave the country and go to the Philippines on May 11.

After being granted an emergency extension allowing McKenna to finish her school year in Canada, a new deportation date has been scheduled for July 11.

"I'm asking for all the support to stay here because McKenna belongs here, I belong here, we belong here. This is our home," Cayanan said.

Recently, Cayanan said her six-year-old daughter was diagnosed with ADHD and Oppositional Defiant Disorder.

In Canada, McKenna is receiving supports in school and is getting medication for her conditions, something Cayanan said wouldn't happen in the Philippines.

"In an impoverished learning environment, without the resources, I don't know that those special needs can be met," agreed registered social worker Susan Otto.

Plus, they added that McKenna only speaks and understands English.

READ MORE: Toronto senior facing deportation allowed to stay in Canada after more than 20 years

A statement from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada said "all foreign nationals are expected to respect our immigration laws by maintaining a legal status while in Canada, restoring their status within 90 days after their status has expired, or returning to their country of origin.

"An individual who remains in Canada more than 90 days after their status expires should leave Canada. From abroad, they may apply to return to Canada through any type of temporary or permanent status they are eligible to apply for."

Options include the permanent residence program or a temporary work permit, according to the government agency.

READ MORE: LBTGQ+ refugee in Quebec facing deportation says he will be killed if sent back to Jordan

"Everyone deserves a work environment where they are safe and their rights are respected. The government takes the safety and dignity of foreign workers very seriously, which is why we've been taking strong action to protect workers since before the pandemic," the statement continued.

"Migrant workers have the same rights to workplace protections under applicable federal, provincial and territorial employment standards and collective agreements as Canadians and permanent residents."

Supporters also say Cayanan has proven herself to be a valuable member of the community.

Despite her status, in 2017 she advocated for children of migrants to have basic rights -- and won.

"Every child born in Canada can access health care now because of her work," explained Clarizze Truscott, vice-chair with Migrante Canada.

Cayanan also helped deliver packages to undocumented people during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Her tireless community work earned her the human rights award from the John Humphrey Centre For Peace and Human Rights. This isn't just given to anybody," Truscott said.

"We should strive to keep these kinds of wonderful people in our community, because these are the people who contribute positively to the community, always," explained her lawyer, Manraj Sidhu.

He is appealing the deportation order based on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. But that process could take three years.

"I don't want to beg, I just want to fight for her rights. McKenna deserves everything, just like other children here in Canada," Cayanan explained.

In the meantime, Migrante Canada launched a petition for the family to stay, hoping to present it to the federal minister of immigration.

The petition already has more than 2,100 signatures.

"No worker should ever feel like this. No human should ever feel like this. No child should ever, ever be part of this process," Haynes said.

"Obviously there's a very real need for workers here, it's all over the media. I don't understand why we're expanding the temporary foreign worker program when we can just let the workers here stay here, that have developed a strong sense of community here."

Migrante said there are currently more than half a million undocumented people in Canada

SEE 

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2022/06/filipino-woman-allegedly-abused-by-her.html

So where were the 'good guys with guns'? Standing around doing nothing, as usual

Lucian K. Truscott IV,

 Salon
May 28, 2022

Uvalde law enforcement officers (Photo by CHANDAN KHANNA for AFP)

Nearly 10 years have passed since the last school shooting that killed as many children as were murdered in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday. That shooting, at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, took the lives of 20 children and six adults. It was supposed to be the mass shooting that changed everything, remember? The killings were so horrific, most of the victims so young and innocent, that surely the House and the Senate could come up with some sort of "common sense" gun control measures that everyone could agree on.

This article first appeared in Salon.

Ha! Ten years have passed, and what has happened? Exactly nothing. Why? At least in part because within days of the Sandy Hook shooting, the National Rifle Association, one of the largest contributors to the political campaigns of (mostly Republican) politicians in the country, swung into action to stop any momentum for new gun laws before they could even get going.

Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the NRA, called a press conference in Washington and with a single sentence, began a refrain about guns and gun violence and gun control that is still with us today: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun," LaPierre said that day. What we might call the LaPierre Rule has become gospel for gun owners, gun manufacturers, and the political party that opposes any sort of gun control, the Republican Party. LaPierre's Rule devolved into sub-rules, such as this gem: The solution to gun violence isn't fewer guns, it's more guns in the hands of more people.

RELATED: Uvalde shooting timeline exposes an ugly truth: Cops have no legal duty to protect you

The NRA began a campaign after Sandy Hook to put an armed police officer in every school and to push for "open carry" laws across the country. These are state laws that allow you to openly carry a gun — of any kind, handgun or rifle — on your person or in your car without a permit. At this point, 31 states have open carry laws on their books. Fifteen states require a permit to carry a handgun, and only five, including the District of Columbia, have laws that ban the carrying of handguns in public.

Last year, the state of Texas passed its own law allowing the open carrying of handguns and other firearms without a permit. That law was passed less than two years after mass shootings in El Paso and Odessa killed 30 people. The solution to bad guys having guns is more guns, see? Texans don't want to make guns harder to buy, or to limit the times and places citizens can carry their guns. They want to make it easier. They want more guns on the street, not fewer guns.

Figures on gun ownership in Texas vary. One study I saw, by World Population Review, says that 45.7 percent of Texas citizens over the age of 18 own a gun. Another study, by the Rand Corporation, says that 37 percent of adults in Texas live in a household with a firearm. A recent report on NBC said that Texas has the highest percentage of gun ownership in the country. After the shooting on Tuesday, a tweet by Gov. Greg Abbott from 2015 surfaced in which he said, "I'm EMBARRASSED: Texas #2 in nation for new gun purchases, behind CALIFORNIA. Let's pick up the pace Texans." The tweet was posted following a report in the Houston Chronicle that gun purchases in Texas had topped one million for the year.

In Uvalde, the "good guys with guns" wearing police uniforms stood around for almost an hour before storming a classroom and killing the murderer of 19 children and two teachers.

No matter which figure you use, that's one hell of a lot of "good guys with a gun" in the state of Texas, don't you think? If all that's necessary to take down a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, the question after the Uvalde shooting is, where were they? Even the good guys with guns wearing police uniforms, it was revealed on Friday, waited almost an hour before they stormed the classroom where the shooter was, and 19 of them waited until they could be backed up by a SWAT team from the Border Patrol before they finally used their guns to kill the murderer of 19 children and two teachers.

The shooter, an 18-year-old resident of Uvalde, had purchased two AR-15 semiautomatic rifles and more than 1,600 rounds of ammunition and 50 — fifty — high-capacity magazines only days after his birthday on May 16. Texas laws require only that you be 18 years old to buy a rifle in the state, but at that age, you can buy any kind of rifle, including a semiautomatic AR-15 style weapon. The shooter was able to buy two of the AR-15s in the days after his birthday when he was apparently already making plans to kill children at an elementary school in Uvalde. Much has been made of the fact that he was not old enough to buy a beer, but he was old enough to buy a rifle capable of firing two to three bullets per second. He was also able to buy the seven 30-round magazines, containing at least 210 bullets.

On Friday we heard reports that citizens of Uvalde, including at least one parent of a child who was killed, were outside the school yelling at armed police officers to go inside and take on the shooter. Cell phone video shot at the scene at 12:37 p.m., while the shooter was inside the school killing children, show one officer holding up his hands trying to prevent a person from filming him and shooing a crowd of people away from the doors of the school. One person can be heard calling to the others that they should enter the school and storm the shooter because the cops aren't doing anything. Another video shot at the same time showed numerous police officers in full tactical gear restraining parents who were trying to enter the school to retrieve their children. One father was pepper-sprayed in the face and a mother was handcuffed. In the background, a police officer in armored gear is hiding behind the bed of a pickup truck aiming his AR-style police rifle at the door of the school.

So some of the good guys with guns were doing exactly what so many cops are accused of every day: menacing civilians and pushing them around and threatening to arrest them for doing nothing that was even remotely illegal.

A spokesman for the Texas Department of Public Safety said Friday that the gunman was in the school for nearly an hour before a SWAT team from the Border Patrol arrived and was able to get into the classroom where he was and kill him. By that time, all the children in the classroom were dead.

Also absent from the scene in Uvalde were any of the 13 million people who own guns in the state of Texas, all those good guys with guns that Wayne LaPierre has told us are the only thing that can stop "a bad guy with a gun."

Watching the coverage of the aftermath of mass shootings in this country has become commonplace. The shooting at the Tops Supermarket in Buffalo happened two weeks ago, and here we are looking at images of yet another exterior of yet another building where someone carrying an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle walked in and killed people, this time children this time. The scene is always the same: Heavily armed police officers clad in camouflage uniforms, protected by bulletproof vests and wearing helmets, along with an entire panoply of military-style tactical gear, are milling around talking to each other. A few of them are dispatched to do what the army calls "set up a perimeter," which in the case of mass shootings amounts to stringing yellow crime-scene tape around the scene and then guarding it so civilians can't get near the scene and presumably contaminate evidence. In Uvalde, at least one armored personnel carrier could be seen near the school after all the shooting was over and all the kids were dead.

There are always a lot of heavily armed police officers at the scene of mass shootings after they have occurred. It is beyond me why they think it's necessary to show up looking like they're about to be dispatched to serve on the front lines in Ukraine or some other war zone. But there they are, wearing enough body armor and carrying enough firepower to assault an infantry battalion, and what are they doing? Standing around.

It's all of a piece. Every time there is another mass shooting, more and more money floods into the budgets of police departments and they go out and buy military-spec M-4 rifles and military-spec shotguns and military-spec body armor and military-spec helmets and military-style camouflage uniforms. Why? Because they're cool, that's why. If they're going to go up against one of these mass shooters, every one of whom is outfitted in military-style tactical gear and carrying military-style AR-15 rifles, then by God, they're not going to be one-upped! Just like Greg Abbott and his exhortation to Texans to buy more guns so they could catch up with California (!), the cops are going to buy more guns and more body armor — more of everything — so they can be ready the next time they're called upon to stand around in a parking lot of a building after 10 or 20 people have been shot and their dead bodies are strewn around the floor somewhere inside.

There's a weird, ironic perfection to the fact that the NRA's convention began on Friday in Houston, offering Wayne LaPierre, who is still the CEO of that august organization of gun-lovers, the chance to come up with yet another exhortation to his masses. One year they tried "my dead hands," as in, if you want my guns you'll have to pry them from my dead hands. Then came Wayne's good guys with guns.

Maybe this year Wayne will explain to us that the reason we've had all these school shootings and mass killings is because we don't have enough good guys with guns. More good guys! More guns! That'll show these mass murderers! Next time one of them shoots up a school, we'll have even more people standing around outside picking their camo-clad asses as the bodies of the dead lie there inside submitting to the ministrations of the crime scene investigators.

More guns, and more crime scene investigators! That'll show 'em that in Texas, we're second to nobody!

So where were the 'good guys with guns'? Standing around doing nothing, as usual

Lucian K. Truscott IV,

 Salon
May 28, 2022

Uvalde law enforcement officers (Photo by CHANDAN KHANNA for AFP)

Nearly 10 years have passed since the last school shooting that killed as many children as were murdered in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday. That shooting, at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, took the lives of 20 children and six adults. It was supposed to be the mass shooting that changed everything, remember? The killings were so horrific, most of the victims so young and innocent, that surely the House and the Senate could come up with some sort of "common sense" gun control measures that everyone could agree on.

This article first appeared in Salon.

Ha! Ten years have passed, and what has happened? Exactly nothing. Why? At least in part because within days of the Sandy Hook shooting, the National Rifle Association, one of the largest contributors to the political campaigns of (mostly Republican) politicians in the country, swung into action to stop any momentum for new gun laws before they could even get going.

Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the NRA, called a press conference in Washington and with a single sentence, began a refrain about guns and gun violence and gun control that is still with us today: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun," LaPierre said that day. What we might call the LaPierre Rule has become gospel for gun owners, gun manufacturers, and the political party that opposes any sort of gun control, the Republican Party. LaPierre's Rule devolved into sub-rules, such as this gem: The solution to gun violence isn't fewer guns, it's more guns in the hands of more people.

RELATED: Uvalde shooting timeline exposes an ugly truth: Cops have no legal duty to protect you

The NRA began a campaign after Sandy Hook to put an armed police officer in every school and to push for "open carry" laws across the country. These are state laws that allow you to openly carry a gun — of any kind, handgun or rifle — on your person or in your car without a permit. At this point, 31 states have open carry laws on their books. Fifteen states require a permit to carry a handgun, and only five, including the District of Columbia, have laws that ban the carrying of handguns in public.

Last year, the state of Texas passed its own law allowing the open carrying of handguns and other firearms without a permit. That law was passed less than two years after mass shootings in El Paso and Odessa killed 30 people. The solution to bad guys having guns is more guns, see? Texans don't want to make guns harder to buy, or to limit the times and places citizens can carry their guns. They want to make it easier. They want more guns on the street, not fewer guns.

Figures on gun ownership in Texas vary. One study I saw, by World Population Review, says that 45.7 percent of Texas citizens over the age of 18 own a gun. Another study, by the Rand Corporation, says that 37 percent of adults in Texas live in a household with a firearm. A recent report on NBC said that Texas has the highest percentage of gun ownership in the country. After the shooting on Tuesday, a tweet by Gov. Greg Abbott from 2015 surfaced in which he said, "I'm EMBARRASSED: Texas #2 in nation for new gun purchases, behind CALIFORNIA. Let's pick up the pace Texans." The tweet was posted following a report in the Houston Chronicle that gun purchases in Texas had topped one million for the year.

In Uvalde, the "good guys with guns" wearing police uniforms stood around for almost an hour before storming a classroom and killing the murderer of 19 children and two teachers.

No matter which figure you use, that's one hell of a lot of "good guys with a gun" in the state of Texas, don't you think? If all that's necessary to take down a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, the question after the Uvalde shooting is, where were they? Even the good guys with guns wearing police uniforms, it was revealed on Friday, waited almost an hour before they stormed the classroom where the shooter was, and 19 of them waited until they could be backed up by a SWAT team from the Border Patrol before they finally used their guns to kill the murderer of 19 children and two teachers.

The shooter, an 18-year-old resident of Uvalde, had purchased two AR-15 semiautomatic rifles and more than 1,600 rounds of ammunition and 50 — fifty — high-capacity magazines only days after his birthday on May 16. Texas laws require only that you be 18 years old to buy a rifle in the state, but at that age, you can buy any kind of rifle, including a semiautomatic AR-15 style weapon. The shooter was able to buy two of the AR-15s in the days after his birthday when he was apparently already making plans to kill children at an elementary school in Uvalde. Much has been made of the fact that he was not old enough to buy a beer, but he was old enough to buy a rifle capable of firing two to three bullets per second. He was also able to buy the seven 30-round magazines, containing at least 210 bullets.

On Friday we heard reports that citizens of Uvalde, including at least one parent of a child who was killed, were outside the school yelling at armed police officers to go inside and take on the shooter. Cell phone video shot at the scene at 12:37 p.m., while the shooter was inside the school killing children, show one officer holding up his hands trying to prevent a person from filming him and shooing a crowd of people away from the doors of the school. One person can be heard calling to the others that they should enter the school and storm the shooter because the cops aren't doing anything. Another video shot at the same time showed numerous police officers in full tactical gear restraining parents who were trying to enter the school to retrieve their children. One father was pepper-sprayed in the face and a mother was handcuffed. In the background, a police officer in armored gear is hiding behind the bed of a pickup truck aiming his AR-style police rifle at the door of the school.

So some of the good guys with guns were doing exactly what so many cops are accused of every day: menacing civilians and pushing them around and threatening to arrest them for doing nothing that was even remotely illegal.

A spokesman for the Texas Department of Public Safety said Friday that the gunman was in the school for nearly an hour before a SWAT team from the Border Patrol arrived and was able to get into the classroom where he was and kill him. By that time, all the children in the classroom were dead.

Also absent from the scene in Uvalde were any of the 13 million people who own guns in the state of Texas, all those good guys with guns that Wayne LaPierre has told us are the only thing that can stop "a bad guy with a gun."

Watching the coverage of the aftermath of mass shootings in this country has become commonplace. The shooting at the Tops Supermarket in Buffalo happened two weeks ago, and here we are looking at images of yet another exterior of yet another building where someone carrying an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle walked in and killed people, this time children this time. The scene is always the same: Heavily armed police officers clad in camouflage uniforms, protected by bulletproof vests and wearing helmets, along with an entire panoply of military-style tactical gear, are milling around talking to each other. A few of them are dispatched to do what the army calls "set up a perimeter," which in the case of mass shootings amounts to stringing yellow crime-scene tape around the scene and then guarding it so civilians can't get near the scene and presumably contaminate evidence. In Uvalde, at least one armored personnel carrier could be seen near the school after all the shooting was over and all the kids were dead.

There are always a lot of heavily armed police officers at the scene of mass shootings after they have occurred. It is beyond me why they think it's necessary to show up looking like they're about to be dispatched to serve on the front lines in Ukraine or some other war zone. But there they are, wearing enough body armor and carrying enough firepower to assault an infantry battalion, and what are they doing? Standing around.

Every time there's another mass shooting, more money flows into police departments to buy military-spec rifles and military-spec shotguns and military-spec body armor. Why? To look cool as they stand around in the parking lot while people die.

It's all of a piece. Every time there is another mass shooting, more and more money floods into the budgets of police departments and they go out and buy military-spec M-4 rifles and military-spec shotguns and military-spec body armor and military-spec helmets and military-style camouflage uniforms. Why? Because they're cool, that's why. If they're going to go up against one of these mass shooters, every one of whom is outfitted in military-style tactical gear and carrying military-style AR-15 rifles, then by God, they're not going to be one-upped! Just like Greg Abbott and his exhortation to Texans to buy more guns so they could catch up with California (!), the cops are going to buy more guns and more body armor — more of everything — so they can be ready the next time they're called upon to stand around in a parking lot of a building after 10 or 20 people have been shot and their dead bodies are strewn around the floor somewhere inside.

There's a weird, ironic perfection to the fact that the NRA's convention began on Friday in Houston, offering Wayne LaPierre, who is still the CEO of that august organization of gun-lovers, the chance come up with yet another exhortation to his masses. One year they tried "my dead hands," as in, if you want my guns you'll have to pry them from my dead hands. Then came Wayne's good guys with guns.

Maybe this year Wayne will explain to us that the reason we've had all these school shootings and mass killings is because we don't have enough good guys with guns. More good guys! More guns! That'll show these mass murderers! Next time one of them shoots up a school, we'll have even more people standing around outside picking their camo-clad asses as the bodies of the dead lie there inside submitting to the ministrations of the crime scene investigators.

More guns, and more crime scene investigators! That'll show 'em that in Texas, we're second to nobody!

Police don't stop crime -- so what are they for?

John Stoehr
May 28, 2022

Police outside Robb Elementary School following a shooting on May 24, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas.

 © Dario Lopez-Mills, AP

Sometimes it’s the little things that evoke the biggest feels. I have been writing about the Uvalde massacre most of the week. I have been so focused on facts and arguments, I haven’t sobbed. But the tears came this morning after reading a report by KENS, a TV news station local to that Texas community, where 19 fourth-graders were shot to pieces.

The report was an eyewitness account by a survivor of the shooting. The boy, whom the reporter did not identify, said he and a friend “heard the shooting through the door.” He added that, “I told my friend to hide under something so he won't find us. I was hiding hard. And I was telling my friend to not talk because he is going to hear us.”

The boy told the reporter what happened after police came through the classroom door Salvador Ramos had locked behind him. “When the cops came, the cop said: 'Yell if you need help!' And one of the people in my class said 'help.' The guy overheard and he came in and shot her.”

That’s it. That’s the detail that got me. A child desperately needing to trust a caring adult. A child shot to pieces for needing and trusting.

Because of a cop’s incompetence.

The boy’s eyewitness account is more damning in context.

The Post reported Thursday that Ramos strolled into the school “unobstructed” with a long gun. Officials had said he encountered three cops. First, an in-school cop. Then, two others arriving on the scene. Officials had said the latter two officers sustained injuries.

Turns out all that was a lie.

Police arrived “four minutes” after Ramos entered the building, officials conceded. Meanwhile, while Ramos was shooting 19 fourth-graders to pieces, they dithered outside for an hour.

A video shows some carrying semiautomatic rifles. It shows one cop with his taser drawn, at the ready. Another cop restrains what appears to be a parent in order to prevent them from entering the building.

This is the context in which the boy’s testimony is even more damning than the incompetent cop who got a girl killed for needing to trust.

Irma Garcia and Eva Mireles were the boy’s teachers, the KENS reporter said. They were shot to pieces. They saved his life, he said.

“They were nice teachers," he said.

"They went in front of my classmates to help.


“To save them.”

We have entered a familiar period after shooting massacres during which officials justify what police did and why. We are hearing Thin Blue Line advocates saying it was reasonable to hang back. After all, the scene was dangerous. The suspect had a semiautomatic rifle.

This familiar pattern, by which police authorities presume the public is on their side, and won’t question them too much, is fraying as more details emerge as to what the police didn’t do and why they didn’t do it.


On the video, you can hear rapid-fire gunshots followed by mothers wailing in despair, pleading with armed police to save their kids.

The good guys with the guns were not that good. Indeed, they were deadly. It was the teachers, who were not armed, who did the most to save their students. The real heroes are dead. The cowards are alive.

But the living get to write history.

Matter of fact, police departments across the country do as much to influence public opinion as they do “crime fighting.” Their influence is so great the public finds it completely understandable when cops refuse doing their jobs in the face of mere scrutiny. It’s so strong cops can get away with murder on account of murder being seen as a tragic but sometimes necessary response to the dangers of facing an infestation of criminals and crime. It’s so huge few complain about Uvalde’s cop shop sucking up 40 percent of the town’s yearly budget.

The influence of American police departments on public opinion is deeply rooted in the reason cop shops exist – yes, to “protect and serve,” sometimes, but more often to serve as the last line of defense against democratic forces threatening to flatten the old orders of social and political power. Cops are white power incarnate.

So expect to hear familiar rhetoric about “brave men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line to protect communities.”

Don’t believe it.

Turn that story around.

What are cops for?

First, they don’t stop crime.

“If larger police forces make us safe, then by that logic, the U.S. would already be the safest society in the world as over $115 billion is spent on policing a year, a budget larger than any other country’s military budget except for China,” wrote Kinjo Kiema. “Over 50 years of crime data shows only 2 percent of crimes end in conviction. Police don’t stop crime that has occurred, nor do they prevent it from happening.”

Second, police don’t stop violence.

“When researchers account for the impacts of socio-economic and other factors, the reality that police don’t protect us from violence — because their purpose is to use violence to maintain ‘order’ premised on existing relations of power — becomes more clear,” according to research by activists Mariame Kaba and Andrea J. Ritchie.

Third, police create violence.

“Police are violence workers,” Kaba and Ritchie wrote. “Their response to violence is more violence or the threat of violence. This means more police, police contact and police resources automatically means more violence because cops add their own violence to what’s already” there.

“They are the sources of violence.”

What are police for?

As I’m writing this, the Times reports that Border Patrol agents arrived earlier than previously known. But when they got there, the local Uvalde cops “would not allow them to go after the gunman who had opened fire on students inside the school, according to two officials.”

They “had driven up from the Mexican border, one official said. The official said it was not clear to the federal agents why their team was needed, and why the local SWAT team did not respond.”

As I’m writing, the LA Times reported that the kids “begged for police to enter their classroom and save them, repeatedly calling 911, as a team of 19 police officers waited in the corridor for an hour because a commander believed the situation had shifted from active shooter to a barricade subject, a Texas law enforcement officer said today.”

They don’t stop crime.

They don’t stop violence.

They create violence.

That’s another detail that gets me. We need to trust law enforcement.

Yet law enforcement so often has us wondering why we should.

John Stoehr is a fellow at the Yale Journalism Initiative; a contributing writer for the Washington Monthly; a contributing editor for Religion Dispatches; and senior editor at Alternet. Follow him @johnastoehr.

TANKS FOR THE MEMORIES
Ukraine has become a graveyard for Russians — and for modern weapons systems

Lucian K. Truscott IV,

 Salon
April 02, 2022

Ukraine Defense Ministry handout

The word "miscalculation" has been thrown around a lot to describe Vladimir Putin's attempt to annex Ukraine, but perhaps his biggest miscalculation lay in thinking he could do it using tanks as his primary weapon. It's clear as the sixth week of the war begins that his apparent plan was to send a column of tanks rumbling into Kyiv, blow up a few things, send Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his government scampering away in fear, declare victory, install a puppet president and go home. Evidence that his plan was a strategic, tactical and political failure is showing on your television screens around the clock. If there is one image that will symbolize forever this war, it will be a blown-up Russian tank, its treads sagging and its turret tilted, rusting by the side of the road in Ukraine.

Thirty years ago, this country used two armored cavalry regiments, a mechanized infantry division and a 400 helicopter-strong air assault to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi forces. Huge formations of tanks crossed the border from Saudi Arabia following massive airstrikes on Iraqi positions. During the assault, three epic tank battles were fought in the desert of Kuwait, one of which is thought to have been the largest tank battle in American history. In less than 100 hours of fighting, U.S. forces destroyed 1,350 Iraqi tanks and 1,224 armored personnel carriers (APCs). In all, some 5,000 Iraqi armored combat vehicles were destroyed, damaged or captured. The U.S. military lost a single Bradley fighting vehicle. What is now known as the first Gulf War was the most celebrated and successful use of armored weaponry in modern history. It seemed as Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles rolled to victory in Kuwait City that powerful armored vehicles had proved their worth as weapons of modern war.

RELATED: Putin's massive miscalculation: Echoes of George W. Bush — and a lesson for America's elites

Putin's attempt to take that lesson and apply it to Ukraine has failed abjectly, and it's not just because the deserts of a Kuwait winter are more amenable to tank battles than the muddy flatlands of an Eastern European spring. Yes, 30 years have passed, and Russia has not kept up with modern technology and tactics, but it's more than that. The fierce determination of Ukraine's fighters has played an outsized role throwing Russian forces into disarray, but size and money and ease of use have played large roles, too.

Russian tanks have met their match because of two Western-made rockets, the U.S. Javelin and the British Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapon (NLAW). Both are lightweight, easily portable, deadly accurate, relatively inexpensive and designed to get around every attempt of modern armor design to defeat them. Lightly armored Russian personnel carriers, constructed mostly of aluminum, can be destroyed using Russia's own RPG-7 rocket launcher, which was designed and deployed more than 60 years ago.

Ukrainian forces have expertly used the Javelin and the NLAW to destroy Russian tanks as they have moved in convoys and deployed in combat to assault Ukrainian cities and towns. The weapons are carried by infantry soldiers on foot and can be fired from positions of cover and concealment. Both are "fire and forget" weapons, meaning that once they have been aimed at a target and tracked for a short period, they can be fired by the user, who is then able to drop the weapon and move away to safety. The NLAW is disposable. The weapon is meant to fire a single missile and then be discarded. The American Javelin can be reloaded and used to fire multiple missiles, but in an emergency can be discarded if the soldier using it has come under fire and must retreat from his or her position. Both weapons are designed to use high-tech location systems to hit the tops of tank turrets where they are lightly armored and highly vulnerable.

But here is the real deal: The NLAW disposable missile costs around $25,000, and the Javelin rocket launcher system costs about $180,000 and fires a missile that costs around $75,000. Both rocket launchers are being used in Ukraine to destroy tanks that cost upwards of $2 million each. The cost differential is obvious. It's even better when you consider the RPG-7, which costs around $1,000 and fires missiles that can cost as little as $100 each. (Costs can go up to as much as $500 for RPG warheads when they use armor piercing or air-burst technology.) Their cost-effectiveness is amazing when you consider that they're being used to knock out Russian APCs costing more than $1 million each. In Iraq, the same RPGs were used by insurgents to bring down American Apache and Blackhawk helicopters that cost between $6 million and $13 million each, depending on the model and year of manufacture.

Ukraine has also made use of armed drones against Russia's heavy armor, such as the T-72 tank. The drones were acquired from Turkey and fire "smart" bombs that are much more expensive than Javelin rounds but have been extremely effective, especially when used to destroy tanks in convoys, where even one disabled tank becomes an obstacle to every vehicle behind it. The infamous 40-mile Russian convoy that moved slowly from the Belarus border to positions around Kyiv was stalled repeatedly by Ukrainian drones and anti-tank weapons fired by infantry. RPGs were also used to take out Russian ammunition and fuel trucks, making the units they were meant to serve less combat-effective.

In fact, Russia's use of armored weapons like tanks and APCs has been a bust. The only thing the Russian military has been effective at doing is standing back from Ukrainian cities and shelling civilian areas with artillery and rocket launchers, which is to say the one thing they've been really good at is committing war crimes. Russia has also been very reluctant to employ its helicopters for both air-mobile infantry and gunship use because the Ukrainian military has been supplied with Stinger and other anti-aircraft missiles, which have been used to take down Russian helicopters as well as fighter-bomber jet aircraft. The cost differential between the ground-based Stingers and expensive Russian air force jets is enormous, which is why Russia has failed to achieve air superiority despite its far better equipped air force and army helicopter units. They have been reluctant to put them in the air, knowing Ukrainians with Stingers are waiting for them on the ground.

The Pentagon has for several decades had a team of military officers from the three major services, along with civilian defense experts and scientists, whose task is to look 25 years ahead, constantly trying to predict what the warfare of the future will look like and prepare for it. Thirty years ago, when the U.S. drove Saddam's army out of Kuwait, we didn't face anti-tank weapons like the Javelin and NLAW. The technology of that time was the plain and simple LAW, a disposable anti-tank weapon that fired an inaccurate unguided warhead that wasn't capable of penetrating American armor, much less the enemy armor of that time.

The Pentagon doesn't talk much about what its seers into warfare's future are up to, but they must be studying what has happened to Russian armor faced with the much smaller and less well-equipped Ukrainian army. Russia has had major problems moving its armored units from their positions across the border before the war into Ukraine, even more problems supplying their tanks and APCs with fuel once they were underway, and problems after that resupplying and refueling tanks once they reached positions where they could be used in combat to invade Ukrainian cities and take territory. Tanks have historically been one of an army's weapons of terror. Their fearsome appearance and firepower has had an understandably intimidating effect on both infantry soldiers and defenses in place.

But tanks sitting still on a road, packed closely together, like those we saw in the infamous 40-mile convoy at the beginning of the war aren't intimidating at all. They are targets, and now many of them are scrap heaps of twisted steel and limp tracks and crooked turrets, all because a foot soldier carrying a 25-pound missile launcher was able to sneak up close enough to fire a warhead that cost less than one percent of the cost of the tank. Those kinds of figures, as they say, are not sustainable. Nor is the tank as a weapon of modern war.

Bombed out: Why we keep on making war, and tolerating it

War is brand new every time it happens, and it's one of our oldest ideas. We claim to hate it, but it's part of us

By LUCIAN K. TRUSCOTT IV
PUBLISHED MARCH 19, 2022

A man walks amid debris in front of a residential apartment complex that was heavily damaged by a Russian attack on March 18, 2022 in Kyiv, Ukraine. Russian forces remain on the outskirts of the Ukrainian capital, but their advance has stalled in recent days, even while Russian strikes - and pieces of intercepted missiles - have hit residential areas in the north of Kyiv. An estimated half of Kyiv's population has fled to other parts of the country, or abroad, since Russia invaded on February 24. 

(Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

The hardest thing I do as a writer is trying to find words to describe the indescribable. It doesn't matter what it is — beauty or bliss or sadness or tragedy or dullness or despair or horror or ecstasy or the ordinary — it's the writer's job. I remember as a young man having a dream that someday I might come up with one great idea. Just one would do it, but that was my goal. Now I realize what I've been doing for more than 50 years is excavating old ideas and finding new ways to express them.

We are witnessing one of man's very oldest ideas in Ukraine. Call it the will to power or the urge to take what is not yours or the wrath of ignorance and pride, every time war is waged it is the same. War is man's inhumanity to man on a mass scale.

Perhaps that is why we become so readily inured to images of war. We have seen them all before — the anguished, bleeding faces of the wounded, the bleakly inert limbs of the dead, the angry fire of explosions, the darkness and sameness of destruction — to borrow Hannah Arendt's term, the sheer banality of it all.
Advertisement:

RELATED: Ukraine and the dark lessons of war: What does it mean to "take" a country or a city?

War is brand new when it first happens, yet after only a day it is already old to us because it has been headlined on the front pages of newspapers, featured on the covers of magazines, flickered across our televisions, splashed on the big screen of movies in Technicolor, engraved in the text of great novels and first-person reports from the front. The most extraordinary scene in the 1970 movie "Patton," the one that I believe gives it staying power, comes when Gen. George S. Patton is on a bluff in North Africa or Sicily seeming to reminisce about having been at that exact spot before during ancient battles. He ends his oration by saying this about war: "I love it. God help me, I do love it so. I love it more than my life."

I don't know if Patton ever said the lines from the movie in real life, but I do know that after I took my grandmother, Sara Randolph Truscott, to see "Patton" the week it came out, I asked her what she thought, and she turned to me and answered with a little smile, "Why, it was just like being in the room with Georgie," calling him by a nickname only his family and close friends used.

Her late husband and my grandfather, Gen. Lucian K. Truscott Jr., knew Patton and served on the same cavalry posts with him between the wars. It's safe to assume she would have known what the man was like, so that's probably as good an assessment we'll ever get of the movie's essence. In Patton's rumination on war, he is saying the unsayable out loud. It makes him seem like a monster, but we are all monsters, we humans who love war, or at least tolerate it such that we keep waging it over and over and over again.

It chills the soul to think that he might be right, but here we are again, 52 years after "Patton" was released, bearing witness to yet another war being fought over the same ground, in the same cities, for largely the same reasons as the war against the Nazis that Ukraine (and Russia) fought 81 years ago. It's tempting to ask why nothing is ever new, but I'm afraid we know the answer all too well.

There is one image of war we haven't yet seen in the coverage of Russia's war against Ukraine. We've seen people sheltering in subway stations and basements and people traveling by train or by car to get to western Ukraine or Poland to escape the bombing and shelling. But we haven't seen the people left behind who don't have the wherewithal or money or even the energy to escape the cities and towns being bombed, and who end up stuck trying to survive in the ruins. I saw an interview with an expert on Ukraine this week who said that 10 percent of the population already lived below the poverty line of about $5 or $6 a day, even before the war began. It won't take long for as many as 90 percent of Ukrainians to be in the same position, he said.

I am certain that there are already people in Ukraine living in the bombed-out ruins of rural homes and urban apartment buildings with no electricity, heat, source of food or water — just existing on nothing. Because I haven't traveled to Ukraine to cover this war, and because all wars are essentially the same, I'll tell you what I saw in Afghanistan in March of 2004 in the ruins of some old apartment complexes and office buildings on the edge of Kabul.

It was like a landscape out of a near-future movie about the world after the Big Bomb, but it was real: Families had fashioned shelters out of the rubble of the buildings, using scrap wood and metal for roofs and more wood scraps and piles of rubble and cheap carpets and blankets for walls, and they were living in the midst of this horrific destruction without electricity or water and only small cooking fires for heat. Here and there, I could see pits that had been dug out of the dirt and sealed with mud walls to make bread ovens, where they could bake flatbread by slapping dough on the curved walls of the pits. But none of the ovens had fires going, because the families didn't have any flour and water to make dough.

I had stopped at a small bakery next door to the Mustafa Hotel, where I was staying in Kabul, and picked up a bag of sugar cookies that I planned on eating as snacks later in my room. I had the bag stashed in a kilim shoulder bag I was carrying, but almost immediately upon entering the ruins, I was surrounded by a crowd of starving children. Their faces were dirty from having not been washed in weeks, and many of them had open infections oozing pus on their legs and arms. They were pawing at me and chattering in Dari and my translator told me they were asking for food and water, so I took out the bag of cookies and began handing them out. It was like being set upon by a pack of wolves, their fingers were tugging and scratching at my pant legs and arms as I tried to spread the cookies evenly between the children. Within a minute or two, they were all gone and the children disappeared into gaps in the rubble and behind the thin rugs where their mothers huddled in the cold.

With my translator, I tried to talk to a few of the women to get their stories: How they had ended up in these ruins in Kabul, how long they had been there, the usual questions a reporter asks in a war. Their husbands, the fathers of the children, had all been killed in fighting between Afghan factions or by the Taliban or by U.S. soldiers, so there were no men in the ruins. My translator explained that widowed women with children were undesirable and were shunned in their villages, which was why they had traveled from distant areas looking for shelter and work and aid from NGOs in Kabul. They had noplace else to go; that's why they were living in the ruins among the detritus of war.

I went back to the ruins once more before I left Afghanistan and handed out flatbread and some bottled water this time. The scene was the same. The children clawed at me desperately. It was all I could do not to throw down the bag of bread and the water bottles and run.

When I returned to L.A. a week or so later, there was a sore on my left forefinger that wouldn't heal. I went to my GP. He examined my finger and took a swab and asked me to wait while he had it tested. A couple of hours later the test came back. It was an MRSA infection. He asked me what I had come in contact with in Afghanistan that might have caused it, and I thought immediately of the children in Kabul with their open sores and cracked lips and desperate eyes. I had touched them repeatedly while handing out cookies and bread in the ruins.

The doctor gave me a big shot of antibiotics and put me on the only pill known to knock down MRSA infections. The sore got worse for a couple of days and then began to heal. The doctor told me that if I had waited to get it treated for even a day longer, I would probably have lost my finger. If I had neglected the infection longer, I could have lost my hand.

This is one of the very old ideas about war I have excavated: After the bombs have fallen and the artillery shells have exploded and the missiles have found their targets, what is left are women and children with no money, no food, no water, living in bombed-out ruins with no place else to go. That was what happened in Afghanistan, and it happened in Sicily and Vietnam and Korea and Iraq and Aleppo and Rome and Jerusalem and Cairo and Mogadishu, and now it is happening in Ukraine. History becomes present becomes future and nothing changes. The thing that is forever is war.


LUCIAN K. TRUSCOTT IV a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist and screenwriter. He has covered stories such as Watergate, the Stonewall riots and wars in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels and several unsuccessful motion pictures. He has three children, lives on the East End of Long Island and spends his time Worrying About the State of Our Nation and madly scribbling in a so-far fruitless attempt to Make Things Better. You can read his daily columns at luciantruscott.substack.com and follow him on Twitter @LucianKTruscott and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV.

Read more on the Ukraine war and its consequences:
Endless war is back — as the merchants of death waltz us toward Armageddon
Putin's invasion of Ukraine exposes the Fox News-QAnon feedback loop
Why I'm going to Ukraine: We deserve the truth — and that's my job