by Eric Zuesse for The Saker Blog
The following combination of articles explains — and they link to conclusive evidence proving — that the United States Government is actually designing its nuclear forces now with the intention to win a nuclear war against Russia (World War III), and no longer (if they ever really were) adhering to the idea (“Mutually Assured Destruction”) that WW III would produce unacceptable catastrophe for both sides, and must therefore be prevented. The U.S. Government is definitely set upon winning WW III, not avoiding WW III. Nuclear weapons are thus being built and deployed by the U.S. Government with the intention to conquer Russia, and this goal has become NATO’s mission, and its only remaining core function, though this fact is not publicly acknowledged. Here are these articles, and their key quotes, showing this:
“Back in 2011, before the B61-12 development program had progressed to the point of no return, FAS sent a letter to the White House and the Office of the Secretary of Defense pointing out the contradiction with the administration’s policy and implications for nuclear strategy. They never responded.”
“As from March 2020, the United States will begin to deploy in Italy, Germany, Belgium, and Holland (where B-61 nuclear bombs are already based), and probably also in other European countries, the first nuclear bomb with precision guidance in their arsenal, the B61-12. Its function is primarily anti-Russian. This new bomb is designed with penetrating capacity, enabling it to explode underground in order to destroy the central command bunkers with its first strike. How would the United States react if Russia deployed nuclear bombs in Mexico, right next to their territory?”
“The US nuclear forces modernization program has been portrayed to the public as an effort to ensure the reliability and safety of warheads in the US nuclear arsenal, rather than to enhance their military capabilities. In reality, however, that program has implemented revolutionary new technologies that will vastly increase the targeting capability of the US ballistic missile arsenal. This increase in capability is astonishing — boosting the overall killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three — and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.”
“The U.S. government’s plan to conquer Russia is based upon a belief in, and the fundamental plan to establish, ‘Nuclear Primacy’ against Russia — an American ability to win a nuclear war against, and so conquer, Russia.”
The U.S. Government’s statements to the public, alleging that Russia is the ‘aggressor’, and that the U.S. Government designs its nuclear program only for ‘defense’ against Russia and other nations, is as much of a lie as was the U.S. Government’s statement in 2002 that Iraq needed to be invaded because the IAEA had found (which it never did) that Iraq was within six months of having a nuclear bomb. The U.S. Government is not to be trusted — no more now than it was then. And also the U.S. regime invaded and destroyed Libya, and Syria, and Yemen, on the basis of lies. No such serial liar should be trusted.
The U.S. regime’s real goal is conquest and control of the entire world — including especially Russia. After the end of the Soviet Union, and of its communism, and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance that had been established in order to defend against America’s NATO military alliance, there is no excuse for this. The U.S. regime’s guilt here is especially outrageous regarding Russia, because invading Russia would destroy the entire world.
The U.S. regime’s craving to control the entire world is sheer evil, and is ‘justified’ entirely on lies (such as the lie that Putin had “seized” Crimea — this being the alleged ‘justification’ for NATO’s ramping up troops and missiles on and near Russia’s borders). One of these lies is that “Putin wants to conquer Ukraine”. Only the grossest of fools could believe that. But it’s not just the Crimea-Ukraine issue where the U.S. regime lies: All U.S. sanctions against Russia are based on clearly proven lies.
Furthermore, the U.S. regime’s increasing moves towards a police-state if not toward ultimately military law for Americans, are drastically reducing Americans’ own freedoms, and this is extremely bad for the American people. The increasing percentages of the U.S. Government’s spending that go to the military have also been spreading poverty and concentrating wealth in the aristocracy; so, only America’s billionaires are benefiting from this imperialism, even within the U.S.
The United States Government is no ‘democracy’, and it has now become the enemy of the entire world, except of the regimes that rule its allied countries, but even its allied countries will be immiserated by such a war as America’s rulers are preparing, on behalf of the owners of Lockheed Martin and other such corporations.
The U.S. regime is the enemy of publics everywhere. It is the biggest threat to the world in all of human history, if Hitler’s regime wasn’t that. And it will be worse even than Hitler’s regime, if its military bases and personnel aren’t expelled from every country before the secretly planned blitz-invasion of Russia ultimately occurs. Only doing that could now prevent such an attack. If this won’t be done, then NATO’s invasion of Russia will. It has come down to that choice, for each and every nation.
On 20 October 2016, NBC News bannered “Philippine Leader Duterte Ditches U.S. for China, Says ‘America Has Lost’”.
On 1 May 2017, Global Research headlined an opinion-article, “No More Crimes Against Peace: Why Canada Must Leave NATO Now”.
Europe’s emerging competitor to America’s NATO is called “Permanent Structured Cooperation”, a dull name so as to avoid especially the U.S. public’s attention. It was announced on 8 September 2017, and then established on 11 December 2017, with a list of “Ambitious and more binding common commitments” and with 25 EU Member States (all of the 28 EU members except: UK, Denmark, and Malta), signing onto those commitments. Its creation was the start of the end of NATO. This has been inevitable ever since the U.S. coup in Ukraine in February 2014 and installation there of a nazi regime, which the U.S. regime had planned to become a member both of NATO and of the EU.
On 9 November 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted, “President Macron of France has just suggested that Europe build its own military in order to protect itself from the U.S., China and Russia. Very insulting, but perhaps Europe should first pay its fair share of NATO, which the U.S. subsidizes greatly!” Perhaps Macron wants to keep France out of WW III. Perhaps, also, Macron wants France to be free to determine its own international policies without needing to adhere to the demands of America’s billionaires, especially the demands which America’s billionaires share with Saudi Arabia’s royal family and Israel’s billionaires,* such as to conquer Syria so as to install there a leader who would be chosen by King Saud and cooperate with America’s billionaires. For example: on December 7th, Al Masdar News headlined “Syria accuses US Coalition of completely destroying hospital in Deir Ezzor”. Deir Ezzor is Syria’s oil-producing region, and the U.S. regime and its allies want to steal Syria’s oil and they’ve therefore been trying for years to destroy the Government’s infrastructures and grab control there.
To understand the broader geostrategic context in which these daily events are happening, click here.
NOTE: There is a possibility that Ukraine might, on December 14th, invade its former Donbass region and provoke there a Russian response that the U.S. regime might use as a pretext to invade Russia, but I doubt that the U.S. regime yet feels confident enough that it possesses “Nuclear Primacy” so as to invade Russia at the present time. So, if such a Ukrainian invasion occurs, the Ukrainian regime, which was installed by the American regime, might turn out to be disappointed.
* On November 27th, “President Trump’s full Washington Post interview transcript, annotated” included Trump’s fullest explanation, to-date, on why he will not blame Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al-Saud for Khashoggi’s murder: “They’ve been a great ally. Without them, Israel would be in a lot more trouble. We need to have a counterbalance to Iran. … It’s very, very important to maintain that relationship. It’s very important to have Saudi Arabia as an ally, if we’re going to stay in that part of the world. Now, are we going to stay in that part of the world? One reason to is Israel. Oil is becoming less and less of a reason because we’re producing more oil now than we’ve ever produced. So, you know, all of a sudden it gets to a point where you don’t have to stay there” (other than to do the will of Israel’s billionaires, and of America’s billionaires who also share in the control of Israel’s Government). An astute observer noted about that comment from Trump:
“As Trump explains now that he holds not only the relations with the Saudis, in order to serve Israel’s interests, but that Israel is “a reason” for the US and its troops remain in the region. With that, Trump has broken a long-standing taboo, because the simple information that Israeli interests are the reason that the US and its troops are in the region, has so far tried to suppress the Zionist lobby with great force and quite successfully. After all, the naked truth does not sound good to the Zionist regime and its henchmen: rows of bombed and destroyed countries, thousands of dead US soldiers and many more cripples, trillions of dollars in costs, and what this all is about: Israel.”
Like many traditionalists, that observer refuses to consider that the royal Saud family might be dominant over the Jewish billionaires, instead of vice-versa such as is the case because the Sauds control the exchange-rate of the dollar and the Jewish billionaires don’t even control much oil at all. But that’s a relatively minor disagreement, in the present context.
Furthermore, on December 8th, The Atlantic bannered “The U.S. Is Paying More Than It Bargained for in the Yemen War” and reported that the Pentagon had written to The Atlantic that (as they quoted from the Pentagon), “Although DoD has received some reimbursement for inflight refueling assistance provided to the Saudi-led coalition (SLC), U.S. Central Command recently reviewed its records and found errors in accounting where DoD failed to charge the SLC adequately for fuel and refueling services,” and the Pentagon refused to indicate just how much of that expense had been charged to U.S. taxpayers — that is, added to the federal debt. However, the Pentagon had to have known the answer to that question because otherwise the Pentagon wouldn’t now be demanding from Crown Prince Salman al-Saud this reimbursement. You don’t demand reimbursement unless you know precisely how much the demand is for. The likely reason why Trump makes this demand at the present time would be that with the public information now known about the murder of Khashoggi, Trump now has a vastly better bargaining-position to demand this money. Trump’s bargaining-position against al-Saud has been greatly improved. He represents both America’s billionaires and Israel’s billionaires. He does not represent the American public. In effect: he negotiates here for those billionaires, against al-Saud.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
That is certainly quite a headline, solidifying the question of will there be war into a statement of fact – yes there will be war because the US is furiously preparing to attack Russia.
And nothing Eric Zuesse says isn’t true.
So the question is “What are we humans going to do about this diabolic plan?
How big a percentage of the human race are even aware let alone concerned enough to do something to prevent it?
Crucially what do the Russians think?
If you knew that your neighbour next door was manufacturing a gun and bullets to go with it and if you also knew for certain that the whole purpose of your neighbour’s actions was to pursue with single minded obsessiveness the task of, when the gun is ready, coming to your house to massacre you and your family, then you might conclude that the sanest thing to do is to take action before the gun is ready.
Informative article. Thank you!
“then you might conclude that the sanest thing to do is to take action before the gun is ready”
Or grab a lawn chair, put on pin hole spectacles and try to suppress your emotions while watching fireworks and listening to humankind screems of agony.
But make sure to be on good terms with God Almighty!
Eric Zuesse is perhaps using the wrong military terminology. Conquer Russia by a surprise invasion ? Impossible. An invasion implies a conventional attack against Russia, which is impossible, as Russia has enough men and high tech for defense. A few years ago even Pentagon generals admitted that NATO cannot defeat Russia in a conventional war.
If by “invasion” Eric Zuesse means a nuclear attack, then an invasion would be pointless, as radiation contaminaton would prevent any such invasion.
I presume Eric Zuesse means the defeat of Russia by nuclear means, and here we have a very dangerous situation. For some years I have been reading articles which present the view of Wall Street and some Pentagon generals that Russia could be defeated by a surprise, sneak nuclear attack with minimal losses to the US (losses to Europe are not mentioned). I sincerely hope that this insane way of thinking does not prevail in the Pentagon and in NATO HQ as a whole, because if it does, then this planet will cease to function. Nobody will win. The Pentagon and NATO better take into consideration the latest Russian high tech, and some of it even NATO does not possess.
“I sincerely hope that this insane way of thinking does not prevail in the Pentagon and in NATO HQ as a whole….”
And I sincerely hope your hope proves right. But if the foreign policy of this current Administration is any indication I am extremely pessimistic. I don’t recall any previous US Administration having such a hostile and abusive geopolitical policy such as the current one. I am also extremely disappointed with the current European leadership. Either they are fine prolonging their status as US vassal states, because they greatly valued the sharing in the spoils; or they are horridly foolhardy. Only time will tell.
I think he means Russia defeat by nuclear strikes followed by “humanitarian ” help from USA Army.
Just like the way they are helping the Syrian people.
He doesn’t mean Russian invasion, or Russian defeat. He clearly means Russian destruction. There won’t be anything for those humanitarians to help if the Tribe gets its way.
And suggesting that the Saudis control the US “billionaires” is nonsense. This is a Zionist-occupied country, a colony of Israel in everything but name. That is obvious.
@ B.F….you are correct that the idea of a successful US nuclear war against Russia is something that is openly discussed in some quarters…there is no reason to doubt that the US would undertake an annihilating first nuclear strike, if it thought it could survive the response…
This is where things get technical…Eric Zuesse is smart writer, but he is not an expert on various missile and nuclear technologies…some of the things he mentioned, such as the updated B61 gravity bomb and the new ‘Super Fuze’ for the Trident submarine launched ballistic missiles…require a firm technical grasp, in order to ascertain just how meaningful these technologies might be…
The updated B61 is of course an offensive weapon…it is designed to be carried by US and allied fighter jets and dropped on Russian territory…however…how would those fighter jets get inside Russian airspace which is acknowledged to be basically impenetrable to aviation…look up Gen Breedlove’s fairly recent comments on Russian A2/AD ‘bubbles’…[ie anti access, area denial]…
So clearly there is no chance that the B61 bomb is a game changer that allows the US to launch and win a nuclear war against Russia…
The ‘super fuze’ is an interesting development for the SLBMs carried by US nuclear subs…nuclear subs are the most survivable strategic weapons, because it is practically impossible to know where enemy subs may be, and therefore impossible to knock them out…
Last year there was a fair bit of talk about this ‘super fuze’ which is designed to increase the accuracy and lethality of the Trident missiles…specifically against Russian ICBM silos…now assuming that the super fuze works as advertised and is able to wipe out each and every silo based ICBM in Russia…it still doesn’t make a US first strike possible…for the simple reason that Russia will still have its mobile, truck mounted ICBMs on land…its nuclear subs…and its strategic bombers such as the Tu160 [in the news recently with the flight to Venezuela]…
However there is reason to doubt that the ‘super fuze’ is actually something that could work as advertised…I will not get into the technical details here, but it is something that I have discussed with prominent figures at the FAS [Federation of American Scientists], which authored the report…
But it really does not matter, because there is no possibility that the US could take out Russia’s submarine launched missiles and its mobile land based missiles, simultaneously with its silo missiles in some kind of supremely effective first strike…this is not a physical possibility…again, the submarines being the hardest to account for…even one Russian sub could destroy several dozen of the USA’s biggest cities…the country would effectively be destroyed…
That does not mean that the US is not working on this ‘problem’…they are…one of the biggest game changers could be a so-called ‘depressed trajectory’ missile flight from the Trident subs…these could hit Russia in less than 10 minutes flight time and the implications of that are obvious…reaction time is really the name of the game…and while a depressed trajectory flight is theoretically possible with the Trident missile…it would involve a much lower accuracy…measured in kilometers…due to the fact that the warhead spends so much time in the atmosphere and is therefore affected by air pressure and winds etc…it also means a much higher heat load on the warhead, to the extent that a ‘normal’ warhead could not survive…
So that is just a quick overview of some of the technical issues…it means that there is really no chance for such a diabolical first use of nuclear weapons to succeed…this will be the case for the foreseeable future…
I haven’t really mentioned the US ‘missile defense’ issue since this is basically smoke and mirrors at this point…however, at some point in time a limited missile defense capability may be possible…
The US will not have nuclear primacy against Russia in 2 years, in 5 years, in 10 years, 50 years or even 100 years. It’s simply impossible against a massive country such as is Russia. You don’t know the location and number of launchers, what they are capable of, how long until they are able to respond, which missiles are loaded etc. etc.. And even if you somehow manage to obtain some of this information through spies and reconnaissance missions, you will never have all of it. If you do, you already have control of the country.
Then there is the issue of hypersonic weaponry, the US does not have this capability and no capability to defend against them. I have seen so many analysts predict that there have to be weapons systems more secret than the colour of Queen Elizabeths underwear, which I doubt, very, very much. They use the monstrously inflated military budget as an indicator of such black budget weapons R&D, as in, the money has to go somewhere. It does, it goes to the over 1000 overt and yet more covert military and intelligence bases, prisons like Abu Ghraib, it goes to financing adventures like the Maidan which are still going on even in Russia, there are tens of thousands of US controlled “NGO’s” active in Russia, still to this day. It goes into ridiculous programs like the F-35, the Zumwalt, that railgun that was supposed to be finished over 10 years ago. It goes to the over 27000 PR “consultants” embedded in US media outlets, probably a whole lot more if we count such propaganda pushers as the BBC, Deutsche Welle etc.. The US military provides access to American products to their military bases abroad, from clothes and tech down to even food products which need to be shipped in on a weekly basis. Just imagine what it costs them, to ship Twinkies, Beef Jerkey and US made Diet Coke around the globe to supply over 1000 military bases so that soldiers stationed abroad can “live the American way of life wherever they are,” actual quote from a leaflet I’ve seen, it’s insane.
There are plenty of “projects” the US sinks it’s military budget into, I’ve just named a list of huge expenses, without even mentioning the rampant corruption, which adds a hefty overhead to each and every item on this list and voila, you arrive at this monstrous sum. I’m sure some of it goes into R&D and a black budget for secret weaponry, but I very much doubt, with this amount of corruption and corroded institutions, that anything competent can come out of there at this point.
I imagine there were similar people, predicting similar things before the fall of all the other previous empires, that there is some sort of secret plan to preserve it all for eternity, alas, there wasn’t. And there won’t be here. They have repeated every single mistake history teaches about the empires of yesteryear, they can’t but continue to repeat them until the very end. Blinded by hubris, arrogance and ignorance, they will run this latest edition of empire off a cliff, as all the morons in the past have done.
The actual military budget of the US is more like 2 trillion. That entity is such a black hole of destruction on our planet, you have to wonder where humanity would have been without the blight that is rampant militarism.
I do not believe in any kind of invented higher being as what many here describe as god, but I certainly wish upon the perpetrators of those crimes an apt and thorough retribution (by whatever divine means possible).
When you say “America” always mind NATO, with more than 100 military bases around the world. — https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-worldwide-network-of-us-military-bases-2/5564
“Russia has the largest land border with the Arctic Ocean. As the ice melts the western oil corporations want control of that vast area. The Rand Corporation has done a study calling for the ‘balkanization’ of Russia – breaking it up into smaller nations so that the oil corporations can get control.
This is why the US keeps saying they want regime change in Moscow. Ukraine is just a sideshow the US-NATO created to excuse major military escalation on Russia’s border. Missile defense deployments are being finalized in Romania and Poland and a new regional US base in Poland will serve as a supply hub for Pentagon war making material. War games along the Russian border by US-NATO are escalating each year.”
The Pentagon’s Strategy for World Domination: Full Spectrum Dominance, from Asia to Africa
Maybe I am too cynical … but I really do believe that the empire doesn’t care if it destroys the world. They only want to make sure no one else can have what they can’t.
Stupid? No … insane? Probably …
The above surmised Plan, to win that nuclear-war of nightmares, is surely not, the accomplished fact of said war; nor, necessarily, even the implication; especially in light of the much reported, accounting mess, of the war/defense budget, whereby, as much as the entire national debt (21 and how many zeros?), has been purloined, and or, black-holed into some various unknown dimensions. What better plan, to cheer along the warmongers, and browbeat the penny-pinchers, than the pursuit of unlimited/unending, universal-suicide, role-playing; however hypothetical, and or illusory, — or not?
That being said, it is still, much better to doubt (as absolutely as applicable ) everything — six ways to Sunday; or, whatever — because, as nine out of ten Doctors on TV know, ‘you can prove anything with statistics.’ Or, in this case, with hyper-velocity links. Not, to make too much light, of so much imminent darkness; but, what practical use is this over-the-top conjecture, when we have only some shady-spooks and fickle-fantoms to look to, for confirmation— we are, loathsomely trapped, in a disinformation-bubble, after all — until we really know, what do we really know, — and then what?
We cannot do anything as individuals. The solution is at State level – thsi is why the neoliberals are so obcessed with destroying the State. Russia, China and several other States are resisting – they have the solution. Their alliance must grow. In other words: this is a class war at global level, the opressed against the oppressor. This class war will result in the end of an era and the birth of another one, with infinite possibilities.
There is much we can do as individuals. The only things that get done are by individuals doing their personal bit to the best of their ability, in concert with their like minded fellows. That’s every last one of us in this doomsday (and all too likely) scenario.
Apart from that point I agree with your comment entirely.
The usa, or more accurately, the zpc/nwo, has wanted nuclear primacy from the very beginning and was livid when Russia developed their nuclear weaponry, which deprived the fascist west of their advantage. They had to settle for mad instead.
The first strike goal was revived under the ray gun regime, but the tech wasn’t there, so it was again put on the back burner. When the usa opted out of the ABM Treaty, it became obvious they again were working on a first strike capability.
This first strike strategy has changed over the years. Initially, it was nuke the opponent into oblivion. But reality killed that when it was realised fallout would kill everyone afterwards.
Later, small, high precision nukes of low yield were to facilitate this first strike. By that time (1980s), though, it was understood that even with low yield weapons, enough particulate matter would saturate the atmosphere to still bring on nuclear winter.
The latest installment of this strategy involves using conventional warheads and high precision to take out the opponents nuke force. This avoids both the radioactive fallout and the nuclear winter problem.
It is understood some opponent nuclear weapons would survive this first strike. These are to be taken care of with abm defense. Hence the usa leaving the ABM Treaty.
The tech for this nuclear primacy still isn’t here. What the zpc/nwo is doing is laying the groundwork. They are making preparations so that once they develope the tech, they can quickly bring it on line and use it.
Good to throw-in the post-war a-bomb idea. These beyond-top-secrets, were betrayed to Stalin’s camp post war; and so, the naturally inflated supremacy of the yanks, was knocked down a half-rung or so (but soon to be set right!) But, again, this narrative doesn’t wholly align with the basic fact that the Soviets had full-knowledge of atomic potentiality; nor the great likelihood that, The Third Reich, was the very first, to construct the bomb; and that this was known, full-well, to all the very concerned parties (and each considered it to be a fat prize). It is more plausible, that these secret-secrets, were horse-traded, in exchange for certain winners-rights, and mutual-guarantees, in the great game of global conquest, even before the war was finished. The white-elephant question is, who wanted these deals to pass? And further, what deals and horse trading are being made now, and with whom, and to what ends? The current narrative, doesn’t align with certain facts, or at least, one stupendous fact: surely, even the living-dead, don’t want to die (save for the alien spacecraft and troglodyte terraria shibboleths).
The above article makes me fall-back to my paranoid masterplan crutch: one world government; one world currency. America the pseudo-great, has failed to fill the earth with her grandeur: and the msm-shills are selling this juicy news to those who are expected to listen: that the dollar is daily being hamstrung; the nations of the earth are yapping at the heels of a big dog who has lost his tooth (but hasn’t left the fight); and now, that the “wounded beast” is most desperate and unpredictable, the simple yet fearsome reality, is fast becoming a revelatory awakening — skin its hide, before it’s too late and it kills us first, . . . and won’t the cutthroats be applauded, and richly rewarded too? . . . unfortunately, war supposedly has many benefits, to the one-world-currency ilk; and because the future one-world-government must have by default, full earthly dominion; it is reasonable to want to test and prove, as much as is feasible, what the war of the future should be — because it remains, thus far unseen. And if this is to be, the final coup-de-grace, by which America is cashed-out, then . . . well, someone will make out. Or, the war of the future is here already, and is now proven nearly perfect; in total manipulation of minds, hearts and pocketbooks.
Typo: On 9 November 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted, “President Macron of France has just suggested that Europe build its own military in order to protect itself from the U.S., China and Russia.
Otherwise good compilation and analysis.
An interesting article about Russian OTH radar developments and how these radars operate.
Spot on: Russia to track future US missiles with upgraded over-the-horizon radar
Without reading further than the the title of the article, I can assure you hybrid warfare will be more effective and exhibits less blow back than outright nuclear exchanges.
That is the future of warfare in combination with economic “bullying”, cyber espionage, false flags, etc. the last warfare we saw was selective engagement via drones by the CIA over Pakistan and population-quelling in Iraq and Afghanistan. I suppose you could count Syria but from my perspective they barely contained a corporate-run and paid-in-cash insurrection (Read: Black Water, etc).
There’s no need for nuclear exchanges. They are simply playing into the behavior of the Russians by letting them spend limited resources along direction X (hard military assets which no matter how much they can muster is less than the collective empire) while possessing an advantage in both resource diversity (internet, propaganda, economic, political, etc), efficiency in their own domains not hard military assets but things like AI, robotic development, bio ware against racial DNA types, etc,, and capability in Y such as culture creation via Hollywood, false flags, TV.
They are woefully exposed by hybrid tactics by virtue of their own population and the surrounding periphery (thanks to the notion of them “losing” the Cold War), the exorbitant privilege of the US being able to bribe individual countries by having access to the largest set of disposable and controllable wealth, and the propensity for Eastern European/Baltic countries to enjoy western culture.
Even if you are right, your assurances about the greater effect of hybrid warfare are irrelevant. The plain and simple fact is that the US is openly taking steps entirely consistent with a first strike intent. Firstly by pulling out of the ABM treaty and placing ABM missiles on Russia’s borders, thus degrading their ability to strike back. Secondly by pulling out of the INF treaty with the obvious intent of placing intermediate range missiles in Europe, thus greatly reducing the available warning time. Faster and more accurate missiles also reduce the warning time available. One could hardly expect that the Russian military would, or could afford to, ignore all that, even if like yourself, they believed that hybrid warfare was a greater danger.
It is my opinion that the erosion of warning time is a huge existential threat to our entire civilisation, maybe even the survival of our species. We nearly had a nuclear war by accident more than once during the last cold war, fortunately the warning times then were large enough to discover that a mistake had been made. If the current US plans come to fruition, then the Russian military would be forced to resort to ‘launch on warning’ or leave themselves open to a disabling first strike, I doubt that any military man would regard the latter option as acceptable. In short, one computer glitch and it would be game over.
Exactly, this is why both of them, particularly Russia, are trying to send newer and newer “space eyes” and satellite hunters. Both realizing that this will really give them an immediate warning which will trigger an immediate response to any incoming threat (missiles if you like).
As for the “Surprise Attack” it won’t happen unless all the satellites are knocked out. The new OTH Radars will also help, but I believe that their use will be secondary as a backup in case the satellites are knocked out.
Hybrid war? One Russian General, was it Mortianov? said that this type of warfare is not new to Russia as Russia used it for centuries. Besides, who is the West going to send? Arabs? They won’t blend in. This type of warfare works only if the attackers are of the same race as the local population. This leaves us with 5th and 6th column, and Russia knows who they are.
Brave article. The quibbling about terms is silly… The Policy of the Angloamerican “Atlanticists” has been established since at least 1945, and if author’s argument is valid, it has not changed.
Between 1945 and the detonation of “Joe 1” (about 2 years before it would have occurred, thanks to the heroic Klaus Fuchs!) the us designed a strategy to conquer USSR, but did not have the (more than 400 I recall) gadgets to do this.
At Oak Ridge in, I believe, ’43, it was obvious to the boffins that critical bomb decisions were made that delayed the first test of a gadget considerably, but which through re-tooling the vast diffusion plant, made both the intent to build bombs on an industrial scale, ie thousands, and the ability to do so quite clear. What other “target” existed?
In 1943 the Imperial designs to use bombs to conquer USSR existed and was noted…and that’s why the plan failed, boffins “leaked” everything to Soviet Intelligence pathways.
To be fair, the USSR had thousands of their people inside the US during the war, spying feverishly…and shipping many tons by lend lease air (curtsy of US Army Air Force) to Russia. Evidently the FDR policy was to turn a blind eye to this. Groves at the bomb project and a few others like him being rare exceptions, fought their own “battles”. FDR planned a troika to rule, China, Russia, US… See Elliot R’s book about it.
I do not expect Russia to surrender.
If they didn’t surrender in ’43…
But valid strategies age usually indirect…so the defensive strategy of R will I expect, be indirect…
There’s a story about “Able-Archer” exercise long ago, that Soviet sappers were present with porto-gadgets in critical positions at one, and presumably many, US locations. I do not seriously doubt that they were.
Of course it would mean the end for most of us, and our children.
See Richard Rhodes’ “Dark Sun” for details – pretty much the first 100 pages about the intelops.
How exactly would it be a ‘surprise’ invasion at this point?
In any case I think it’s unlikely USA/NATO would try to invade the Russian Federation or otherwise wage a hot war against it.If history is anything to go by the Americans have only ever entered wars where the odds were heavily in their favor.Plus, before they attack they sow internal discord in the target country and destabilize it,weaken it through economic warfare,isolate it in the international arena and drag neighboring(and European) countries into a military coalition against the target country – only after that does the USA invade a country.In Russia’s case not only have the Americans have had little to no success in satisfying those four initial conditions, they have no way of making sure the odds are heavily in their favor in a war against Russia.So despite the noise it’s very unlikely the USA would invade the Russian Federation.
I read somewhere that ground invasion no longer figures in US war-planning at all, that they are basing their intent on the East India Company models, controlling populations by installing puppets or co-opting (bribery or blackmail) existing native power-holders–with a small, highly mobile force of arms contingent as back-up, if necessary, and for policing operations, as used in Iraq.
That is in keeping with the 1000 or so US lily-pad bases dotted around the world and the dramatic increase in special forces recruitment to man them, that have sprung up in recent times.
The surprise will be of a first strike nature, if they ever get the capability to pull it off.
Crosstalk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_AUWsMKVOE include Jim Jatras saying “this will end in war”…
I see that a “Jim Jatras” has posted at least once recently at Saker.
The YT of today’s Crosstalk is followed by Hedges flogging his book…also a good thing if you are unaware of it.
Perhaps they missed the latest developments regarding Russian nuclear armed bombers in South America….
Which possibilities has a country
ridden of hubris
despite the fact being indebted too much ?
A country fought mostly wars (except when it concerns Japan) with countries much less competitive in war machineries ?
Less experienced (the last 60 or so years) with a real competitive country ? or even a country much more advanced in war machineries and excellent trained soldiers ? With a country which doesn’t want to go to war but nevertheless is excellent prepared for defense ?
If hubris and arrogance are “concerted” (big banking, big looting and with it the big companies for military equipments and so forth) – so it seems:
a war is in the making.
The United States will attack Russia alright … but in the way that it has already been doing for quite some time such as:
-Unending Two Minutes of Hate campaigns against Russia in the Western controlled “Free Press” and broader media-entertainment complex.
-Staging False Flag attacks to be blamed on Russia (like the Skripal poisoning; downing of the Malaysian airliner in Ukraine; or CIA-style “Vault 7” cyber false flag attacks, as exposed by Wikileaks)
-Destabilization campaigns in the cultural-religious realms, ranging from Pussy Riot to the recent USA-induced split in the Orthodox Church.
-Deployment of Lawfare involving the manipulating of a country’s legal system to destabilize or regime it (see the American regime change of Brazil)
-Colored Revolutions/Coup d’etats
-Support of ethnic secessionist elements (like in Chechnya, Dagestan, etc)
-Financial terrorism/warfare waged through American Dollar Imperialism
-Cultivation of anti-Russia nations around its periphery
-Attempt to achieve American Escalation Dominance in the military realm through development of Missile “Defense” System, which is designed to enable American first strike attacks (aka US Prompt Global Strike doctrine) without fear of a counter-response.
-Attempt to assert American nuclear primacy over Russia.
It should be mentioned that these tactics aren’t limited to targeting Russia but are the USA’s standard operating procedures against *any* country, group, or movement that stands in the way of American global tyranny… sorry … American global “leadership.”
They have been/are applied to one degree or another against Syria, Iran, China, Venezuela, Nicaragua, North Korea, Cuba, Libya, etc.
This is warfare by other means–akin to what some term Hybrid War, or US military strategists call Fourth Generation Warfare.
Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach To Regime Change
But really, this is 21st-Century Total War in which all elements of human civilization (military, economic, political, ethnic, cultural, religious, informational, and media) are mobilized for war.
So will the USA outright invade Russia?
They will do so only after Russia has been softened up by the aforementioned tactics.
Indeed, the American would prefer to have a quisling pro-American regime in Russia “invite” American/NATO troops to set up military bases inside the Russian Federation or, at least, to invoke the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) pretext to invade Russia for “humanitarian” reasons after it has been sufficiently weakened.
This is how the American Empire rolls.
Identify, analyze, and develop counters to its tactics in order to defeat the America threat.
Thank you so much for bringing this critical information to the people.
Your courage is well-noted.
I am having a difficult challenge understanding how anybody, but here specifically in the context of the 0.1% financial/power elite, can see any kind of ‘success’ in a nuclear strike of minimum size to gain a tactical defeat of Russia?!
I read several years ago, an analysis of a most limited ‘hypothetical’ confrontation between Pakistan and India, involving approximately 50 devices, would cause sufficient particulate into the atmosphere to cause a 2-3 degree lowering of the global temperature, and subsequently 250M-1B deaths by starvation (to start)!
What’s more, after such a tactical strike, couldn’t it reasonably be expected to cause a domino effect, in which the last moral constraints (and sanity) of human governments/power-mongers would be broken, and thus open a global ‘can-of-worms’ for every tinpot dictator to acquire and use nukes. While I’m not only thinking of them, the situation in the extremist Ukraine-tyranny suggests itself to … anything.
So the questions:
1. Just what do the 0.1% agency(ies) expect as outcomes from the initiation of such a hell-on-earth?
2. Is the religious pro-apocalyptic agency really a relevant factor?
3. Is there any common affiliation that binds the proponents of this planned global genocide?
Thank you again, and also to our host.
I will have a stab at your questions:
1) It is not a good idea to try to understand or out-think psychopathic behaviour, you will lose whichever way. It is enough to recognise it when you see it. However, it can, with great difficulty and vigilance, be contained.
2) It is relevant if you accept the statistics of believers in fundamental Christianity in the US and the promotion of Dominionism in the armed forces and the political use of those beliefs to manipulate the believers (to sway voters etc.).
3) See answer one, the P word, ‘megalomaniac’ is another good one.
I believe it is fundamentally impossible for any of the large powers to actually conquer any of the others. Each is simply too large with too many people.
To conquer a nation requires the follow on stage of occupation of the nation. We saw in Iraq after the 3rd Iraq War launched by Dubya/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld the huge logistical nightmare of trying to occupy a nation of even 20 million people. And it is a sure thing that any of the large nations, China, Russia, USA, would have a vast majority of people rising in opposition to any attempted conquest and occupation by any of the others.
Of course, the USA government is very capable of making mistakes. Like the ones they made in Iraq where they first believed the fantasy that the people would greet them waving little American flags. Or the fact that they did not forsee resistance to their occupation. Thus, it is quite possible that this current generation of silly neocons would believe that they could conquer Russia. Its just quite certain that it would not actually succeed.
The really bad news is that in the attempt the neocons would trigger nuclear winter and therefore end this era of human civilization. The other bit of bad news is that since America is a police-state oligarchy, the American people would have little chance of preventing this disaster.
”And it is a sure thing that any of the large nations, China, Russia, USA, would have a vast majority of people rising in opposition to any attempted conquest and occupation by any of the others.”
Russia and China — yes, absolutely. The US not very likely. The parlously sick mentality which defines the US national character boils down to psychotic hatred of all and sundry. The shooting sprees and the fetishism of firearns are not signs of strength, let alone resolve — they are proof positive of a people feeling the end is coming to their parasitic misappropriation of the world’s global output. If they can’t kill Russians or Chinese or whomever their Government deems worthy of genocide — well, at least they can cannibalize themselves as a solid contribution to world peace.
I suspect that, just like during the first Cold War, that all these nuclear weapons the US is “modernizing” aren’t in fact intended to be used, but merely intended to be paid for by the taxpayer, as yet another means of transferring weallth to the rich corporations who fund US politicians campaigns.
The Pentagon surely is aware that as long as Russia has missiles against which the US has no defense – the five announced by Putin last March – and as long as Russia has a viable second strike capability via submarine and long-range bombers, a “surprise first strike” is not going to be able to “conquer Russia”. China, perhaps, but not Russia. The fact that US missiles might be more accurate or more able to penetrate ground facilities than previously does not significantly change the relative balance of power in terms of how much damage can be done to Russia and whether Russia has the capability to inflict unacceptable levels of damage on the US.
The real consideration being hidden from the public is not the intent to conduct a surprise first strike on Russia but rather that the entire nuclear arsenal is just another welfare program for the rich. There may be some – perhaps many – idiots in the US government who know nothing of nuclear war and assume the US can actually win a nuclear war but in the end it is likely they will be overridden by those who do understand the consequences.
The other danger is that Russia will perceive the same threat as Eric and launch its own surprise preventive nuclear attack in concert with China. Threatening someone with credible annihilation tends to produce unpleasant reactions.
“The other danger is that Russia will perceive the same threat as Eric and launch its own surprise preventive nuclear attack in concert with China. Threatening someone with credible annihilation tends to produce unpleasant reactions.”
Indeed. Notice that it really doesn’t matter even if “the entire nuclear arsenal is just another welfare program for the rich.” (as you put it) We can still die either because the Chinese and/or the Russians believe their best chance is to fire first or because a false alarm wasn’t recognised in time.
Certainly a surprise Nuclear attack was the plan, the missile bases in Poland and Romania and coup in Ukraine are only understood by this idea. Russia’s new weapons, the Drone torpedo and the hypersonic cruise missiles invalidate this. One worry is that the Pentagon lives in a fantasy world. When the idea of Nuclear Winter became reality, they just issued contracts to think tanks who said Nuclear Winter is not a problem.
I met a launch officer who related an interesting incident. He never found out if it was a glitch or a psychological test, but the lights came on and the orders to launch missiles. 27% refused to launch missiles. Since it takes 2 keys to launch it means 73 x 73 = only 53 % of missiles actually launching. If you do the math, this would result in a failed First Strike. The Pentagon proceeds anyways, if nothing else for more budgets and retirement positions.
Like Hitler they too are mad and the frontier states are stupid to believe that they’ll live out the period of AID & Green Card to full US Citizenship. The Materialistic literate mind set pervading the Baltic and front line states surrounding Russia is mind boggling.Eastern Europeans cognitive dissonance akin to the Wahhabi Fanatics destructive desperation, is surreal.
The following is purely speculative and hypothetical.
Assume relative parity between Team X and Team Y.
What would make Team X confident that a sudden, surprise strike on Team Y would
result in an outcome where Team X survives the counterattack?
One possible answer: Team X would require some form of physical protection, such as, for
example a system of underground bunkers that were so well hidden, disguised, or so impenetrable
that the best weapons thrown against it by Team Y would prove ineffective.
In this scenario then, in order to prevent a surprise attack, Team Y merely needs to
demonstrate its capabilities in detecting, mapping, accessing, penetrating and obliterating any
system of physical protection.
For example, underground bunkers can could be detected by analysis of satellite photography
in any set of wavelengths that reveal non-trivial amounts of sub-surface minerals being deposited
on the surface. Analysis of seismographic records could reveal locations as well. Where penetrating
weapons prove ineffective in early stages of the conflict, other advanced late-stage strategies could
be formulated, such as steerable drill strings employed to deliver ordinance or agents in the weeks
or months after the initial attack.
If all teams could be made to realize that no survivable scenario exists, then perhaps, just
perhaps, all parties would negotiate terms to sustain a lasting peace.
The reader may decide for themselves whether or not this hypothetical game is
worthy of any more consideration.
Yes, there are reports of DUMBs, or Deep Underground Military Bases that government and military elites can hide in to survive a nuclear holocaust or similar catastrophic event–while of course the vast majority of humanity is simply abandoned to die. These DUMBs are reputed to exist both deep underground and below the ocean floor.
Some of the speculation about DUMBs may be outlandish–such as the idea that they house aliens from outer space–but they apparently do exist.
I will post a video, courtesy of Sputnik Ellada about Putin’s March speech. The video has Russian voice and Greek voice over, as well as Greek subtitles. It demonstrates all the latest weapons in Russia’s arsenal, current or in near future.
Pay attention to the destruction in Japan, as demonstrated in the video, where Russia says 450,000 people may have died. Consider the minuscule size of those weapons as opposed to modern ones.
Those who speak Russian , listen to this : … названа конкретная дата начала масштабного наступления ВСY. — http://rusvesna.su/news/1544700628
Who are these people who fear death…? If we Americans could manage to smile death in the face, our government would not have turned us into slaves.
The world is seeking a balance. Take it from a wage slave in America…I know for a fact that Ivan has something up his sleeve, and I know that the USA is on the way out. Russia will decimate the USA and vice versa.