May 9, 2023 - 6:00pm
Daniel Ellsberg, the former RAND Corporation analyst who leaked the now-famous Pentagon Papers, has said that treating China and Russia as a joint target is “insanity”.
In a recent interview with Democracy Now!, the onetime military analyst claimed that the escalating conflicts in Ukraine and Taiwan constitute an “insanity that has taken over the public”. “It is as insane as QAnon or as the belief that Trump is currently the president of the United States,” Ellsberg said, before adding that there was now a “real possibility of a nuclear war”:
Ellsberg said recently leaked intelligence documents demonstrate that, much like the war in Vietnam, the situation in Ukraine has become a bloody stalemate. He added that the alleged decision of Boris Johnson and other Western leaders to dissuade Volodymyr Zelenskyy from signing a peace deal in April 2022 was a “crime against humanity”:
Ellsberg attributes part of his motivation to speak about the war in Ukraine to his recent diagnosis of inoperable pancreatic cancer, and has claimed he is “living this month as though it is my last”. As one of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara’s leading military analysts, Ellsberg rose to fame when he came to work on a top-secret report, US Decision-Making in Vietnam, 1945–68, now known as the Pentagon Papers.
The report, which Ellsberg leaked to the press following the expansion of the Vietnam War into Laos and Cambodia, revealed that four US presidents (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson) had subsequently misled the the public by hiding the extent of American involvement in Vietnam in the lead-up to official war on the ground.
In the decades since being cleared of all charges brought against him by the US Government, Ellsberg has continued to advocate against the use of nuclear weapons in ongoing military conflicts. When asked about what troubles him in the time that remains, Ellsberg replied, “At this point I’m much more aware of […] how little has changed in these critical aspects of the danger of nuclear war, and how limited the effectiveness has been to curtail what we’ve done.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“However the war started, and, I think, with both incredibly bad judgment by Putin and aggression and atrocity, and on the other hand provocation by the United States”
The Left claims anyone who thinks the Ukraine war has any cause other than Putin wanting to be Hitler is a far-right extremist. So the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, the hero of the anti-war Left, is now officially a far-right, Putin-loving, Nazi.
And the loons who actually believe that are running the country. God help us, because only He probably can.
Real conservatives also think anyone making excuses for Russia is a totalitarian toady. Calling Putin right-wing is absurd. He’s a KGB colonel with neo-Soviet Imperialist dreams.
Real conservatives also think anyone making excuses for Russia is a totalitarian toady. Calling Putin right-wing is absurd. He’s a KGB colonel with neo-Soviet Imperialist dreams.
“However the war started, and, I think, with both incredibly bad judgment by Putin and aggression and atrocity, and on the other hand provocation by the United States”
The Left claims anyone who thinks the Ukraine war has any cause other than Putin wanting to be Hitler is a far-right extremist. So the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, the hero of the anti-war Left, is now officially a far-right, Putin-loving, Nazi.
And the loons who actually believe that are running the country. God help us, because only He probably can.
It always puzzles me why those who advocate acquiescence to those who threaten to use nuclear weapons don’t see the danger in setting a precedent that says “threaten nukes, get your way” – if that precedent is established, more will want (and threaten to use) nuclear weapons as a failsafe bargaining chip. My guess is that won’t bode well for “human survival”.
It always puzzles me why those who advocate acquiescence to those who threaten to use nuclear weapons don’t see the danger in setting a precedent that says “threaten nukes, get your way” – if that precedent is established, more will want (and threaten to use) nuclear weapons as a failsafe bargaining chip. My guess is that won’t bode well for “human survival”.
Yet another fool trying to claim some sort of moral equivalence between the West and Russia. At the same time that he admits “the probability of a Russian crime of this sort” he seems to be claiming that they were “provoked” into committing the crimes. As any intellident person knows, “being provoked” is no defence when caught committing criminal acts.
And while he’s struggling to see those contradictions in his claims, he nevers seems to stop to consider whether Russia and China might be provoking the West or other countries.
Another fool with a blinkered and biased view of the world trying to force fit a preconceived world view onto the facts. And failing.
Another old tankie. They’ve all come out of the woodwork over the last year.
The Yanks are everywhere making trouble, with the help of their various compromised lapdogs. If they’d just put a plug in it, the world could take stock (and a most-welcomed breather).
Another old tankie. They’ve all come out of the woodwork over the last year.
The Yanks are everywhere making trouble, with the help of their various compromised lapdogs. If they’d just put a plug in it, the world could take stock (and a most-welcomed breather).
Yet another fool trying to claim some sort of moral equivalence between the West and Russia. At the same time that he admits “the probability of a Russian crime of this sort” he seems to be claiming that they were “provoked” into committing the crimes. As any intellident person knows, “being provoked” is no defence when caught committing criminal acts.
And while he’s struggling to see those contradictions in his claims, he nevers seems to stop to consider whether Russia and China might be provoking the West or other countries.
Another fool with a blinkered and biased view of the world trying to force fit a preconceived world view onto the facts. And failing.
In my view, Mr. Ellsberg has earned more respect than he is being shown here. The fact that successive American administrations lied through their teeth about events in south east Asia is not exactly a secret. That America “did not cover itself in glory” in Ukraine, in the years between 2010 and 2016, is said even by many on the political left. Talk about regime change! Put me down for the view that Ellsberg got it just about right.
In my view, Mr. Ellsberg has earned more respect than he is being shown here. The fact that successive American administrations lied through their teeth about events in south east Asia is not exactly a secret. That America “did not cover itself in glory” in Ukraine, in the years between 2010 and 2016, is said even by many on the political left. Talk about regime change! Put me down for the view that Ellsberg got it just about right.
Ellsberg ignores the tiny detail that any “peace agreement” would have involved much more than just allowing Putin to keep Donbas and Crimea.
Putin could have had them without war–or a peace deal–by simply declaring them part of Russia.
Even assuming Russia was sincere (they weren’t–a head of TV entertainment isn’t a serious negotiator), any peace deal in April of 2022 would have involved ceding Kherson and Kharkiv Oblasts.
Has anyone noticed that they are now part of Ukraine again?
I’m sorry for Ellsberg’s illness. But he simply isn’t thinking clearly.
Ellsberg ignores the tiny detail that any “peace agreement” would have involved much more than just allowing Putin to keep Donbas and Crimea.
Putin could have had them without war–or a peace deal–by simply declaring them part of Russia.
Even assuming Russia was sincere (they weren’t–a head of TV entertainment isn’t a serious negotiator), any peace deal in April of 2022 would have involved ceding Kherson and Kharkiv Oblasts.
Has anyone noticed that they are now part of Ukraine again?
I’m sorry for Ellsberg’s illness. But he simply isn’t thinking clearly.
Not unreasonable for UnHerd to seek a contrarian article on Ukraine. But they are struggling with credible exponents if this the best they can get.
Historically, and esp as he worked with Mcnamara, he should remember how much ‘nukes sabre rattling’ Khrushchev did, only to back down when West didn’t weaken. Subsequently both sides put in place additional safeguards to prevent lower level authorisation and additional immediate contactability between White House/Kremlin. One assumes both still functioning. Plus of course Xi will have been pretty clear with Putin the boundaries of support.
Not unreasonable for UnHerd to seek a contrarian article on Ukraine. But they are struggling with credible exponents if this the best they can get.
Historically, and esp as he worked with Mcnamara, he should remember how much ‘nukes sabre rattling’ Khrushchev did, only to back down when West didn’t weaken. Subsequently both sides put in place additional safeguards to prevent lower level authorisation and additional immediate contactability between White House/Kremlin. One assumes both still functioning. Plus of course Xi will have been pretty clear with Putin the boundaries of support.
”“It is as insane as QAnon or as the belief that Trump is currently the president of the United States,””
What? You putting down the 46th President?
WWG1WGA
anyway – don’t listen to this old fool, go to Youtube and watch Colonel MacGregor.
If you want to go further out on the anti war side try Scott Ritter, and all the way out there – with Alexander Mercouris, but although Ritter has some good credentials he has some issues – but worth listening to. Mercouris – he is a bit too out there – but can be interesting. His old cynical, drunk, foreign correspondent in a sleazy hotel room shtick is fun – but he is in actually a disgraced Barrister by trade. He is right out of Waugh’s ‘Scoop’
On Rumble try ‘Redacted News’ – again, pretty far out there on the Rusky end – but very interesting. And Kin Iversen is always good.
Indeed.
According to them, the Russian Army is still outside of Kyiv.
Indeed.
According to them, the Russian Army is still outside of Kyiv.
”“It is as insane as QAnon or as the belief that Trump is currently the president of the United States,””
What? You putting down the 46th President?
WWG1WGA
anyway – don’t listen to this old fool, go to Youtube and watch Colonel MacGregor.
If you want to go further out on the anti war side try Scott Ritter, and all the way out there – with Alexander Mercouris, but although Ritter has some good credentials he has some issues – but worth listening to. Mercouris – he is a bit too out there – but can be interesting. His old cynical, drunk, foreign correspondent in a sleazy hotel room shtick is fun – but he is in actually a disgraced Barrister by trade. He is right out of Waugh’s ‘Scoop’
On Rumble try ‘Redacted News’ – again, pretty far out there on the Rusky end – but very interesting. And Kin Iversen is always good.
Lies.
Any citations for that? I’ve heard US and UK leaders support such a settlement, but never Ukrainians, and certainly not Zelenskyy.
This is Ellsberg’s narrative and obviously based on his own twisted view of the world.
This is Ellsberg’s narrative and obviously based on his own twisted view of the world.
Any citations for that? I’ve heard US and UK leaders support such a settlement, but never Ukrainians, and certainly not Zelenskyy.
Lies.
Democracy Now! Hmm, lol
Democracy Now! Hmm, lol