Page 50 of 52 FirstFirst ... 4046474849505152 LastLast
Results 981 to 1,000 of 1036

Thread: World War Three Thread....

  1. #981
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    Yep

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  2. #982
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    New York police investigate Russian consulate death

    The New York police department is investigating after a man was found dead outside the Russian consulate in New York with trauma to the head.

    Police say the man, 63, was unconscious when they arrived on Tuesday morning.

    1 hour ago
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37913345



    Police say they will not release further information while the investigation is ongoing

    He was later pronounced dead at the scene.
    Medical examiners will conduct an autopsy to determine the cause of death.

    Russian consular staff told the BBC the man was a consular employee and he had died of "a heart attack".


    The identity of the man has not yet been released.

    The staff member said consular officials had found the body at around 07:00 EST (11:00 GMT) and called New York police.

    The consulate said the cause of the head trauma was still unknown and they would not release further details while the case was under investigation.



    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 46m
    BREAKING The MILITIA warns about the possibility
    of Ukraine's mass attackand breakthrough
    on US election day, UAF can go for broke
    nato


    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 30m
    BREAKING NAF return fire
    It took them 12 hours of hell endured by locals
    Minskagreements rule



    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 29m
    BREAKING Ukrainian assault reported
    in Olexandrivka w. of Donetsk NAF r repelling

    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 15m
    BREAKING Hostilities amid heavy fighting & shelling
    spread to Lugansk Republic>
    500km of the fronline now CONTESTED
    ukraine nato osce



    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 14m
    BREAKING I wonder if Putin or Lavrov
    will say about Minskagreements
    after Ukraine has unleashed hell in Donbas
    > all run to shelters



    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 12m
    BREAKING UKRAINE DONBAS FIGHTING INTENSIFIES
    AT THE WHOLE 500KM FRONT ALL WEAPON CALIBERS USED


    Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 10m
    BREAKING CLINTON HAS BEEN NOT ELECTED YET
    BUT THE WW3 HAS STARTED IN DONBAS
    CLINTON=WAR


    112 News ‏@112NewsFeed 8h
    Turkey establish direct ferry with annexed Crimea
    http://112.international/politics/tu...mea-10761.html
    Ukraine Europe news

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  3. #983
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    What The Hell Just Happened In Russia: Powerstation Explosion In Naval Base Region – Helicopters Landing On Moscow Streets – Dead Man Found At Russian Consulate in New York

    Mac Slavo
    November 8th, 2016
    SHTFplan.com
    Comments (85)
    Read by 37,995 people

    Something serious appears to be happening in Russia, as well as at the Russian Consulate in New York.

    Speculation abounds as multiple events taking place in the last few hours indicate that either a very coincidental set of circumstances just happened, or an attack has been initiated against Putin’s government.

    Here’s what we know right now.

    On the heels of a previously announced pre-positioning of cyber warfare assets last week and some 300,000 NATO troops preparing for battle in Europe, we learn this morning from RT that a massive blast at an electrical substation in Murmansk, Russia has left part of the region without power.

    What makes this outage particularly interesting is that Murmanks is the main administrative base for the entire Northern Russian Fleet.
    The northern Russian port city of Murmansk, with a population of 300,000, has been partly left without electricity following an emergency at an energy facility. Eyewitnesses captured a bright flash, after which the lights went out.

    There have been eyewitnesses’ reports of a “huge blast” at one of the city’s electrical substations, according to SeverPost news agency.

    There is apparently no electricity in government headquarters in the city center, FlashNord reported citing its correspondent in the area. Lights have been off in both central areas and in the outskirts, according to SeverPost.
    An incident happened at one of the facilities of the Kolenergo regional energy company, its press service told RT, without specifying what exactly happened.
    The causes of the “incident” are now being investigated by a special commission, the company said, adding that specialists are now working on damage control and recovery.
    Hat tip: God Like Productions ; Sourced Via RT

    Video:



    Авария на Мурманской ТЭЦ #Мурманск #авария #пожар
    A video posted by Kinder-потрошитель (@x_xxgd95) on


    While no information has been made available about the cause of the blast, there is speculation that the explosion and subsequent outage may have been the result of a virus or trojan similar to the Stuxnet hardware virus that took down Iranian nuclear reactor centrifuges. A similar cyber warfare tool could be used to take down electric power stations much like the cyber attack on a U.S. water treatment facility in Illinois several years ago.

    In and of itself that event would normally be dismissed as just a power outage, except just a few hours ago numerous helicopters landed on city streets in the Baumanskoj suburb of Moscow. Witnesses are reporting a huge police presence in the area:

    Нечто странное происходит на Бауманской, прилетели три вертолета, много полицейских pic.twitter.com/MURwF3W2qI
    — Медиазона (@mediazzzona) November 8, 2016


    And even that wouldn’t necessarily be all that suspicious as a stand alone event, but since it’s election day and the Obama administration has threatened Russia with a significant response should they be found to be meddling in U.S. elections, the fact that a dead man with head trauma was found at the Russian Consulate in New York City this morning gives us a hat trick of very odd events occurring at exactly the time when U.S. elections are taking place:
    Police are investigating after a 63-year-old man was found dead inside the Russian Consulate on Manhattan’s Upper East Side on Tuesday morning.

    Authorities say they found the man unconscious and unresponsive at the location on 91st Street just before 7 a.m., reports CBS New York.

    The victim, who has not yet been identified, appeared to have suffered head trauma, police said.

    Source: CBS News


    All of this begs the simple question: What the hell is going on with Russia right now?




    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  4. #984
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    Russia Fully Deploys 2 New Divisions Near Western Border

    November 29, 2016

    The Russian military says it has completed the deployment of two newly formed motorized infantry divisions at the nation's Western borders.

    Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday the two divisions are stationed in the Belgorod, Voronezh and Smolensk regions near Russia's border with Ukraine and Belarus.

    He said volunteer contract soldiers make up 70 percent of their strength, but didn't specify how many soldiers the two divisions have. Russia maintains the compulsory one-year draft, but has increasingly sought to enlist volunteers for longer terms of duty to boost the military capability.

    Shoigu said the military has built dozens of new facilities to house and train the troops.

    The deployment comes amid continuing tensions with the West after Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea and support for pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine.

  5. #985
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    The US is about to send a shit load of tanks and armored gear to shore up NATO forces along the borders in Europe.

    Fort Carson is deploying about 4500 troops I think I read along with all the hardware they need.

    http://kdvr.com/2016/11/30/fort-cars...ince-cold-war/

    Fort Carson prepares for biggest deployment to Europe since Cold War

    POSTED 11:26 AM, NOVEMBER 30, 2016, BY ANICA PADILLA



    (Photo: U.S. Army Fort Carson)

    FORT CARSON, Colo. — Operations are underway at Fort Carson to prepare for the mountain post’s biggest deployment to Europe since the Cold War.


    Approximately 4,400 soldiers are headed to eastern Europe for a nine-month deployment, the Colorado Springs Gazette reports.


    They’ll bring along more than 2,800 vehicles, including 72-ton tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, containers, trailers and a few thousand firearms.


    The 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, began loading the first trains that will send a heavy brigade’s worth of equipment overseas in support of Atlantic Resolve, Army officials said on Facebook last week.
    “The Army is now working to shore up North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies against rising Russian aggression,” the Gazette reported. “The centerpiece of that effort will be the 3rd Brigade, which will be spread across eastern Europe from the Baltic to the Black Sea starting in January.”


    “The rotations throughout Europe will demonstrate the continued U.S. support of its NATO allies while simultaneously allowing Soldiers to bilaterally train with their foreign counterparts,” according to the Fort Carson Mountaineer.


    The rail operations at Fort Carson will continue over the next month, Staff Sgt. Ange Desinor wrote in the Mountaineer.


    “During our nine-month rotation, we’ll routinely exercise, mass and move throughout the European theater to refine our ability to maneuver an armored force across alliance member states,” the Mountaineer quoted Warrant Officer 1 Abraham Rosales, 3rd ABCT mobility officer, as saying.


    Rosales said the plan is to move all the equipment to Poland within a couple of weeks of its arrival to Germany.


    “The full set of equipment will arrive in Bremerhaven, Germany, and then move by rail, commercial line haul and military convoy to Poland, where 3rd ABCT will consolidate before dispersing units to Germany and across six other countries from Estonia to Bulgaria,” Desinor wrote.


    ost href="https://www.facebook.com/USArmyFortCarson/photos/a.421021314733.197400.105314739733/10154927614554734/?type=3&theater" fb-xfbml-state="rendered" fb-iframe-plugin-query="app_id=249643311490&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FUSArmyFortCa rson%2Fphotos%2Fa.421021314733.197400.105314739733 %2F10154927614554734%2F%3Ftype%3D3%26theater&locale=en_US&sdk=joey">ost>

    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  6. #986
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    U.S. Army Fort Carson

    November 27 at 1:00pm ·







    WROCLAW, Poland — When it comes to strategic planning for a deployment, there are several factors that need to be considered: open space for training, living quarters for personnel, hygienic facilities and even the transportation of equipment to and from the site. Everything must be planned out and accounted for in order for the mission to be successful.
    Leaders assigned to the 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, took these factors into consideration as they conducted a predeployment site survey in Poland Nov. 3, 2016.
    “This predeployment site survey is part of the U.S. commitment to deterrence here in Europe,” said Brig. Gen. Kenneth L. Kamper, deputy commanding general, 4th Inf. Div. and Fort Carson, who leads the 4th Inf. Div. Mission Command Element for Atlantic Resolve in Baumholder, Germany. “It’s the first of consecutive nine-month, what we call ‘heel-to-toe,’ rotations of our armored brigade combat teams.”
    Read more at http://www.fortcarsonmountaineer.com/?p=15251.


    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  7. #987
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    Russia warns US against easing arms embargo
    on Syria-based militants


    12/09/16
    http://www.therussophile.org/russia-...ilitants.html/
    This post was originally published on this site

    Moscow warns the US against acting on a decision to ease its arms embargo
    against Syria-based militants, saying the move would pose a threat to the
    entire Middle East as well as the Russian forces on anti-terror mission in Syria.

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said US weapons could end up in wrong
    hands if Washington goes ahead with the plan to lift restrictions on arms
    the deliveries to the so-called “moderate” militants.

    On Thursday, the White House said US President Barack Obama had
    relaxed the so-called Arms Export Control Act for the militants “supporting
    US Special Forces” in Syria, saying such leniency would contribute to “the
    national security interests” of the US.

    “Certainly, the worst result of this decision would be those weapons,
    including MANPADs [man-portable anti-air missiles], ending up in the
    hands of terrorists, which of course poses a serious threat not only for the
    region, but for the entire world,” Peskov said.

    The official said such weapons could “definitely” end up being used against
    the Russian air force, which has been aiding counterterrorism operations in
    Syria since last September.

    Last year, Washington earmarked almost $500 million to arming and
    training of the “moderates.” It had also slackened its arms embargo against
    certain militants back in 2013.

    Meanwhile, talks between Russia and the US on a ceasefire in Aleppo have
    so far failed to produce a tangible result.

    Peskov said talks on the subject were complex and kept faltering due to US
    moves.

    Russia and China last week vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, calling
    for a seven-day truce in the embattled Syrian city, where the Syrian
    government has been conducting successful anti-terror operations.

    The Syrian army troops and their allied forces are now in control of about
    85 percent of militant-held eastern part of Aleppo as they press ahead an
    all-out offensive to fully liberate the city.

    Russia and Syria oppose lengthy pauses in the Aleppo battle, arguing that
    Takfiri militants may take advantage of the situation and rebuild their
    strength.

    Moscow also insists that all militants operating in eastern Aleppo must
    leave the area as part of any truce deal, saying those who refuse to do so
    would be regarded as terrorists.

    In another development on Friday, the UN human rights office said the
    remaining militants are blocking civilians from fleeing the eastern parts to
    the government-held sector.

    “Some of the civilians who are attempting to flee are reportedly being
    blocked by armed opposition groups,” rights office spokesman Rupert
    Colville told reporters in Geneva.

    On Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Syria’s Aleppo will
    continue to come under bombardment as long as militants stay in the city.

    “After a humanitarian pause, (the strikes) have resumed and will continue
    for as long as the bandits are still in Aleppo,” Lavrov told journalists in
    Hamburg.

    Turkey-backed FSA advance

    Separately, it was reported that Turkish warplanes had destroyed 10
    targets allegedly belonging to the Takfiri terror group of Daesh in northern
    Syria.

    Using Turkish support, militants with the foreign-backed so-called Free
    Syrian Army (FSA) were also said to have seized control of a highway
    between the key towns of al-Bab and Manbij in the area.

    Turkey has been supporting the FSA against anti-Daesh Kurdish forces,
    whom it calls anti-Ankara terrorists and accuses of not falling back from the
    vicinity of the Turkish-Syrian border after making gains against the Takfiris.

    Leading a major operation, the Kurdish fighters seized Manbij from Daesh
    back in August.

    Ankara, a staunch opponent of the Assad government, is accused of having
    been providing anti-Damascus militants with generous arms support and
    safe passage.

    On Thursday, Turkish media reported that the country had sent 300
    commandos to northern Syria to reinforce the operation.

    Experts, meanwhile, warn that the recent Ankara-backed FSA advance
    could be followed by direct confrontation between Turkish troops on the one
    side and Kurdish fighters and Syrian soldiers on the other.
    _________


    Pravda Report ‏@engpravda 4h
    US to supply terrorists with tanks and missiles
    http://www.pravdareport.com/video/09-12-2016/136381-usa-0/ …


    US to supply terrorists with tanks and missiles

    09.12.2016
    http://www.pravdareport.com/video/09.../136381-usa-0/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TKVL8q3W1A


    Barack Obama has lifted restrictions on weapons supplies to Syria.
    As Administration of the US President explained, it is connected with
    preparations for an assault on the Syrian city of Raqqa, which is
    controlled by the IS fighters.

    A source in the White House said that lift of restrictions allows delivery
    of weapons, ammunition and military equipment to the US allies in Syria,
    who are preparing a campaign on Raqqa's liberation. The city is considered
    to be a capital of the IS fighters in Syria.

    At the same time the US President has abolished all the present bans
    on funding to Syria, which is under the US sanctions now as a country
    which allegedly supports terrorism.

    The Pentagon and State Department will still have to get approval
    from the US Congress to render military aid to the so-called moderate
    forces in Syria, as they call them in the US. In fact, those are professionally
    trained fighters.

    Namely they, as the Defence Ministry reported, shelled the Russian
    hospital in Aleppo.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  8. #988
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    NATO Hunting At Least One Russian Navy Oscar II Class Submarine That Is Chasing Aircraft Carriers In The Mediterranean Sea

    December 9, 2016

    Several Maritime Patrol Aircraft are involved in a big hunt: one (possibly two) Oscar II-class submarine that Russia has sent after NATO warships.

    According to military sources close to The Aviationist, a big hunt is underway in the eastern Med: several MPA aircraft, including U.S. Navy P-8 Poseidon jets operating from NAS Sigonella, Sicily, are looking for one, possibly two, Russian Navy submarines operating in the vicinity of a group of warships of the NATO Maritime Group.

    What makes the news even more interesting is the fact that the Russian Navy submarine would be an Oscar II Class, that is to say a “carrier killer” sub, designed with the primary mission of countering aircraft carrier battlegroups. Among the NATO vessels in proximity of the Oscar II there is also the French Charles De Gaulle nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the USS Eisenhower is not too far away either.

    Therefore a massive Cold War-style hide-and-seek in underway, keeping both sides quite busy.

    Although heavily defended, large flattops are vulnerable to submarines and can’t be considered immune from receiving battle damage or being limited in their fighting ability by a modern sub operating nearby: nuclear or diesel-powered subs have proved to be able to slip in the middle of the multi-billion-dollar aircraft carrier’s defensive screen, while avoiding detection by ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare) aircraft, and pretend-sinking U.S. (or allied) carriers and most of their escort vessels.

    Those were scripted drills, with the flattops put in the most challenging conditions for training purposes; still, the simulated sinkings once again prove that aircraft carriers’ underwater defenses, albeit excellent, are not impenetrable and subs still pose a significant threat to powerful Carrier Strike Groups.

    Especially when the attacker is a quite advanced Oscar II class nuclear-powered guided-missile submarine (SSGN) using long-range SS-N-19 “Shipwreck” ASCMs (anti-ship cruise missiles).

    Based on the latest reports, 8 Oscar IIs are in active service built in the 1980s and early 1990s, eight remain in service. Even though deemed to be inferior to those of the Akula II, the acoustic performance of the Oscar II class is believed to be superior to early Akula-class submarine.

    In 2016 Russia has started a multiyear plan to modernise all its Project 949A Oscar II-class subs that includes replacing the 24 SS-N-19 missiles with up to 72 newer 3M55 Oniks (SS-N-26 ‘Strobile’) or 3M54 Klub (SS-N-27 ‘Sizzler’) anti ship missiles.


  9. #989
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    Scaparrotti Surveys Ukraine's Front Lines
    Against Russia


    Military.com | Dec 15, 2016
    by Richard Sisk
    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...es-russia.html


    Col. Nick Ducich, commander of the Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine
    speaks to Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti at the International Peacekeeping
    and Security Center, Nov. 23, 2016. (Photo by Army Staff Sgt. Elizabeth Tarr)

    In a signal to Moscow of U.S. and NATO resolve,
    Army Gen. Curtis M. "Mike" Scaparrotti ended
    a two-day visit to Ukraine on Thursday in which
    he toured the combat positions of Ukrainian troops
    facing off against a combined Russian and
    separatist force.


    On his second visit to Ukraine within three weeks,
    Scaparrotti, the dual-hatted Supreme NATO commander
    and head of U.S. European Command, went to
    eastern Ukraine, "where he visited Ukrainian
    military units involved in combat operations
    with Russians and their proxy forces" along what
    is called the "line of contact," EuCom said
    in a statement.


    Scaparrotti also met with Ukrainian Minister of Defense Stepan
    Poltorak and Chief of the General Staff Viktor Muzhenko on the
    continuing training of Ukrainian forces by NATO and the supply
    of "non-lethal" aid by the U.S.

    Russian news outlets took note of Scaparrotti's front-lines tour.
    The government-owned Sputnik news agency said that
    Scaparrotti's visit was focused on inspecting the performance
    of U.S. equipment supplied to Ukrainian troops.

    The EuCom statement said Scaparrotti's visit underlined the
    U.S. and allied commitment to Ukraine's defense.
    "The United States continues to call for an immediate end
    to Russia's occupation of Crimea and for Russia to cease its
    destabilizing actions in Ukraine and honor its commitments
    in the Minsk agreements," it states.

    The tour of the eastern combat zone came three weeks after
    Scaparrotti's last visit to Ukraine, during which he met with
    U.S. troops of the Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine
    at the International Peacekeeping and Security Center in
    Yavoriv, well away from the front lines.

    During the November visit, Scaparrotti observed the training of
    Ukrainian forces by a multinational group including troops from
    the U.S., Poland, Lithuania, Canada and Britain.


    Scaparrotti's latest visit to Ukraine came on the same day
    that a European Union meeting in Brussels agreed to extend
    sanctions on Russia for six months over the takeover of Crimea
    and the intervention in eastern Ukraine. Russia's annexation
    of Crimea in 2014 triggered the first round of sanctions.

    The U.S. and its NATO allies have expressed increasing
    concerns over Russian threats against the Baltic states and
    the military buildup in the Kaliningrad Russian enclave
    bordering Lithuania.

    At NATO headquarters in Brussels on Thursday, NATO
    Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said he had invited
    members of the NATO-Russia Council, the forum bringing
    together NATO ambassadors and Russia's top diplomat
    attached to the U.S.-led alliance, to a meeting in Brussels
    on Monday.

    "When tensions run high, as today, it is even more important
    to have direct dialogue with Russia," Stoltenberg said.
    -- Richard Sisk can be reached at Richard.Sisk@Military.com.

    S2 Intel ‏@StratSentIntel 5h
    USAF RQ-4 Global Hawk drone monitoring Donbas Ukraine

    ^ Click to embiggen


    BREAKING New EUCOM chief
    Supreme Allied Commander Europe Curtis M. Scaparrotti
    visited Ukrainian Armed Forces in Donbas
    at the frontline




    URL="https://twitter.com/StormBringer15"]Storm Bringer ‏@StormBringer15 [/URL] 2h
    ___________




    Top US commander in Europe
    meets with Ukraine troops, officials amid Russia tensions


    By ALEX HORTON | STARS AND STRIPES
    Published: December 15, 2016
    https://www.stripes.com/news/top-us-...sions-1.444674

    Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, U.S. European Command Commander, reenlist Soldiers
    assigned to 6th Squadron, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team,
    3rd Infantry Division, at the International Peacekeeping and Security Center,
    Nov. 23, 2016. Scaparrotti was here to interact with soldiers and observe Ukrainian
    soldiers during their 55-day training rotation at the Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine.

    Elizabeth Tarr/U.S. Army



    The top U.S. commander in Europe visited Ukrainian front-line troops
    and defense officials as tensions with Russia continue,
    the Pentagon announced Thursday.


    Army Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, commander of U.S. European Command,
    met with Ukrainian Minister of Defense Stepan Poltorak and Chief of the
    General Staff Viktor Muzhenko during the span of two days, a news release
    stated.

    They met to discuss security cooperation, military reform and ways
    to improve relationships between the two nations, the release stated.

    Scaparrotti also visited troops involved in ongoing combat operations
    against Russian troops and their proxy forces, the release stated
    , as
    the conflict simmers. The war began in spring 2014 after political upheaval
    in Ukraine led to separatist groups battling for territory in the Donbass
    region bordering Russia.

    Ukrainian troops have engaged in bloody campaigns against Russian-
    backed forces since April 2014. In some cases, the battles are reminiscent
    of World War I trench warfare and artillery barrages mixed with modern
    battlefield fixtures such as drones and GPS-aided mortar positions.
    More than 2,400 Ukrainian troops have been killed in the conflict.

    The visit is Scaparrotti’s second in a month,
    following his outing at Joint Military Training Group-Ukraine,
    where approximately 350 U.S. troops conduct training
    with Ukrainian counterparts.


    Scaparrotti’s visit comes after Congress approved the 2017 National
    Defense Authorization Act, which includes $150 million to train and equip
    Ukrainian forces. That builds on $250 million of “non-lethal aid” in 2015,
    which included night-vision equipment, counter-radar technology,
    body armor and vehicles.

    About 130 aged U.S.-supplied Humvees have been sent to Ukraine,
    Victoria Nuland, U.S. assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian
    affairs, told Congress in March. The vehicles arrived in poor condition
    and were used infrequently by Ukrainian special operations troops
    known as Spetsnaz, The Washington Post reported last year.

    Tensions between Russia and the United States have increased since
    Russian forces annexed Crimea and backed the insurgency in Ukraine
    with proxy forces, and in some cases deploying Russian troops to fight.

    In response, the Pentagon has significantly increased the presence of
    troops and warfighting equipment in Europe to counter Russian aggression,
    with $3.4 billion allocated this fiscal year for the ongoing European
    Reassurance Initiative — tripling last year’s budget.

    The 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team of the 4th Infantry Division,
    based at Fort Carson in Colorado, is deploying its 4,000 soldiers to take
    up positions across Europe as part of Operation Atlantic Resolve as the first
    brigade of a plan to continuously rotate units through Europe. The unit will
    gather at a German port to disperse its vehicles and equipment next month.

    One battalion stocked with M1 Abrams tanks will cover the Baltic region
    of Estonia and Latvia, while another will operate in Germany.
    A mechanized infantry battalion with M2 Bradley troop carriers and M1
    Abrams tanks will have a foothold in the Romanian and Bulgarian region,
    Stars and Stripes reported in November.

    3rd Brigade’s headquarters will remain in Poland, along with an armored
    cavalry unit and a field artillery battalion wielding self-propelled M109
    Paladin howitzers.

    The 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, based at Fort Drum in New York,
    will deploy 1,750 soldiers in March to forward-based locations in Latvia,
    Romania and Poland.

    European allies have identified the need of more aviation assets in
    the region to counter Russian air power and augment infantry and armor
    capabilities, Stars and Stripes reported in November.
    horton.alex@stripes.com
    Twitter: @AlexHortonTX




    _____________




    US Commander in Europe Checks Use of US Equipment in Donbass

    20:10 15.12.2016
    https://sputniknews.com/europe/20161...-equipment-us/

    The Commander of European Command and Supreme Allied Commander
    Europe visited Donbass to check the effectiveness of use of US equipment
    provided by Washington to Ukraine.



    © AP Photo/ Efrem Lukatsky
    Ukrainian Forces Fire at Russian Journalists in Donbass


    KIEV (Sputnik) — Commander of European Command and Supreme Allied
    Commander Europe Curtis Scaparrotti visited the military operation zone
    in Donbass to check the effectiveness of use of US equipment provided
    by Washington to Ukraine, the press-service of the General Staff
    of Ukrainian Armed Forces said on Thursday.

    "American military delegation visited the anti-terrorist operation zone…
    During the visit the American party got acquainted with the security politics
    on the territory of Luhansk and Donetsk regions and saw the effectiveness
    of the use of equipment provided by the US," the statement says.

    The Ukrainian government has been conducting a military operation in
    the country's eastern regions since April 2014. In February 2015, Kiev
    and the southeastern militia signed a deal in the Belarusian city of Minsk
    on reconciliation. The deal includes a ceasefire and means to monitor
    and verify it, and the withdrawal of weapons from the line of contact.

    According to the latest UN data, the total number of the victims of
    the conflict amounts up to more than 10,000 people.

    The US consistently expressed support of Ukraine in the conflict
    and supplied military equipment to Kiev which included radio systems,
    unmanned aerial vehicles, tracking radars and other non-lethal systems.


    UNIAN.info ‏@UnianInfo 11h
    Ukraine's central bank closes 18th insolvent bank this year
    http://www.unian.info/economics/1682...this-year.html


    112 News ‏@112NewsFeed 9h
    Kolomoisky agrees for PrivatBank nationalization after December 20
    http://112.international/ukraine-top...-20-12134.html


    ^^^ Oligarchs get their money from Ukr Government,
    who gets it from the US & IMF loans...




    PrivatBank
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PrivatBank
    PrivatBank (Ukrainian: ПриватБанк) is the largest commercial bank in Ukraine,
    in terms of the number of clients, assets value, loan portfolio and taxes paid
    to the national budget.
    PrivatBank has its headquarters in Dnipropetrovsk, in central Ukraine.

    In March 2014 was named by the American review Global Finance (magazine)
    as "the Best Bank in Ukraine for 2014" while British magazine "The Banker" in
    November 2013 named again the same bank as "the Bank of the year 2013 in Ukraine".

    According to Moody's Investors Service it has the best "Bank Financial Strength Rating"
    (BFSR) among all others rated banks in Ukraine. On 9 October 2013 Fitch Ratings
    rated PrivatBank 'A-(ukr)' with stable outlook and affirmed on 14 February 2014.

    On 13 August 2014 Standard & Poor's raised its rating outlook to 'stable' due to
    the better liquidity ratio than peers in the Ukrainian banking system.

    More than 30 thousand people are employed with the bank system.

    By the results of banking market survey, conducted by GFK Ukraine,
    PrivatBank services are used by one out of three Ukrainian banks clients (33.2%),
    and one out of four (24.9%) uses a wide range of services and considers
    PrivatBank as his/her main bank.


    ^^^ When nationalized, this will cut out a great deal of taxes
    paid in to Kiev's coffers...



    In The Peninsula ‏@Inthepeninsula 5h
    Kolomoysky Privatbank agrees to nationalization.
    Kiev Ukraine are also bankrupt.
    Ukraine one step closer to complete financial chaos.



    :dot5: A little history:

    Ariana Gic ‏@GicAriana Feb 22
    Oligarch Kolomoisky stole $1.8 billion in IMF aid to Ukraine
    totally consequence free.

    https://harpers.org/blog/2015/08/undelivered-goods/ …

    Ariana Gic ‏@GicAriana Feb 22
    Think about the scale of corruption.
    War is raging, economy plagued by recession,
    $1.8 B stolen, & NOTHING happens.

    Ariana Gic ‏@GicAriana Mar 30
    Piece fails to mention Ukraine Today
    s funded by oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky,
    who stole $1.8 billion in IMF funds.

    http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...st-kept-secret

    ___________



    UNIAN.info ‏@UnianInfo 11h
    Poroshenko asks the Dutch
    to speed up EU-Ukraine deal finalization

    http://www.unian.info/politics/16826...alization.html



    UNIAN.info ‏@UnianInfo 6h
    EU deal on Ukraine could unravel in Dutch parliament
    http://www.unian.info/politics/16834...arliament.html



    112 News ‏@112NewsFeed 5h
    The official date of consideration of visa-free regime for Ukraine
    disappeared from @Europarl_EN website

    http://112.international/ukraine-top...ite-12148.html

    112 News ‏@112NewsFeed 2h
    Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine says
    visa-free regime is a matter of months,
    but can't speculate with dates
    http://112.international/ukraine-top...day-12153.html


    UNIAN.info ‏@UnianInfo 2h
    Date for Ukraine visa lib vote removed from EP website
    http://www.unian.info/politics/16836...p-website.html

    __________



    OSCE: Ukraine mobilizing hundreds of Heavy Weapons to Donbass

    pete john ‏@petejohn10 2h
    There are new objects APU to engage our units,
    in case of transfer of the enemy on the offensive:


    200+ APU weapons missing from stock areas




    News from Donbas ‏@NewsFromDonbass 9m
    December16 Essence Of Time unit in Donbass situation report
    with DPR map #NewsFromDonbass

    http://eu.eot.su/2016/12/16/december...port-with-map/

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  10. #990
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    Political Insanity: Outgoing President Obama’s “Operation Atlantic Resolve” against Russia: US Sends 3,600 Tanks Against Russia – Massive NATO Deployment Underway
    Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky
    By Donbass International News Agency and Prof Michel Chossudovsky
    Global Research, January 05, 2017
    Donbass International News Agency 4 January 2017
    Region: Russia and FSU
    Theme: Militarization and WMD, US NATO War Agenda

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/outgoin...derway/5566679



    Dangerous crossroads: Is Obama intent upon waging a military operation on Russia’s border prior to the end of his presidential mandate?

    This military onslaught could potentially create a fait accompli.

    Are these deployments of US tanks and troops part of Obama’s “act of retribution” against Russia in response to Moscow’s alleged hacking of the US elections, which according to the director of National Intelligence James Clapper constitute an “Existential Threat” to the Security of the US.

    As we recall Obama on December 29th “ordered a series of retaliatory steps against Russia”.

    Is this a “fast-track” procedure on the part of the outgoing president, with the support of US intelligence to create chaos prior to the inception of the Trump administration on January 20th?

    According to Donbass International News Agency Service, “A Massive US military deployment should be ready by January 20.”

    Political Insanity prevails.

    And insanity could potentially unleash World War III.

    Meanwhile none of this is front page news. The mainstream media is not covering it.

    Below is the report of the Donbass International News Agency report.

    Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 5, 2016

    * * *

    The NATO war preparation against Russia, ‘Operation Atlantic Resolve’, is in full swing. 2,000 US tanks will be sent in coming days from Germany to Eastern Europe, and 1,600 US tanks is deployed to storage facilities in the Netherlands. At the same time, NATO countries are sending thousands of soldiers in to Russian borders.

    According to US Army Europe, 4,000 troops and 2,000 tanks will arrive in three US transport ships to Germany next weekend. From Bremerhaven, US troops and huge amount of military material, will be transported to Poland and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe.

    USA is sending to Russian borders 3rd Brigade of the 4th Infantry Division. Overall, more than 2,500 pieces of cargo are shipped to Germany, where those will be unloaded in the period January 6-8. US military material and troops will continue to Poland by rail and military convoy’s. Massive US military deployment should be ready by January 20.

    “Some 900 cars with military materiel will be transported by train from Bremerhaven to Poland. There are also about 600 pieces of freight that will be transported by train to Poland from the military training ground at Bergen-Hohne. Nearly 40 vehicles will travel directly by road from Bremerhaven to Poland,” told Bundeswehr press office.

    “Three years after the last American tanks left the continent, we need to get them back,” said Lieutenant General Frederick “Ben” Hodges, commander of US forces in Europe.

    He made the statement during a visit to the Logistics School of the Bundeswehr in Garlstedt, Lower Saxony. He told journalists that the measures were a “response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Crimea.”

    While NATO is preparing for war against Russia, Hodges turned everything upside down and accused Russia of preparing for war. “This does not mean that there necessarily has to be a war, none of this is inevitable, but Moscow is preparing for the possibility,” Hodges said.

    In the dangerous escalation against nuclear-armed Russia, which poses the danger of a third world war, the German Bundeswehr is playing a central role. “Without the support of the [German] Army, we can go nowhere,” Hodges said during an appearance at the Joint Support Service of the Bundeswehr.

    Germany, which rolled over Eastern Europe in its war of extermination 75 years ago, is preparing to send combat troops to the Baltics. In January, 26 tanks, 100 other vehicles and 120 containers will be transported by train to Lithuania. Germany will send the 122nd Infantry Battalion.

    At the same time total of 1,600 US fighting vehicles are due to be stored at a six-warehouse complex in the southeastern village of Eygelshoven, near the Belgian and German borders. The Eygelshoven facility was originally opened in 1985 during the Cold War, when it was used by US troops to practice drills in case of a possible Soviet attack, wrote RT News.

    Abrams Tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Paladin artillery have already started arriving in what is part of a $3.4 billion Congress-approved scheme to increase NATO military capability in Europe. Storage sites are also planned to be reopened in Poland, Belgium and Germany.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  11. #991
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    What is the date on this article, Vector? Did it have one? Nevermind, I see it. 4/5 January 2017.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  12. #992
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,612
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    Next question, how accurate IS this site anyway? I have seen them before, but have no experience with them or where they collect their data.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  13. #993
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    It's been reported at other news sites: US Tanks Roll Into Germany To Bolster NATO Deterrent

    The deployment marks the start of a new phase of Operation Atlantic Resolve, which foresees the continuous presence of an American armoured brigade combat team in Europe on a nine-month rotational basis. The mission is meant to help allay concerns from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and other NATO allies over an increasingly unpredictable and bellicose Russia.

    The new forces will gather first in Poland, then fan out across seven countries from Estonia to Bulgaria. A headquarters unit will be stationed in Germany.

  14. #994
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    US tanks and soldiers in Poland pose threat to Russia – Kremlin



    Russia sees the deployment of US tanks and other military vehicles, along with army personnel, as a threat to its national security and interests, Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov said.[/FONT]

    “We see this as a threat. These actions pose a threat to our interests and security,” Peskov told journalists on Thursday, stressing “especially, when a third country is beefing up its military presence along our borders with Europe.”



    100’s of US tanks, heavy equipment flow into Europe to counter ‘Russian aggression’


    “And this is not even a European country,”
    he added.

    Eighty-seven battle tanks, 144 Bradley fighting vehicles, and over 3,000 soldiers are on their way from Germany to Poland. An official ceremony to mark the arrival of the US servicemen was scheduled to take place on January 12.

    The brigades are to be deployed mainly in the western part of Poland, but drills have been planned that are to be conducted across the whole country.

    After the military exercises, the soldiers are to be distributed among Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, and the Baltic countries. A headquarters unit will be stationed in Germany.

    The arrival of American military equipment and personnel in Poland is another step in Operation Atlantic Resolve, a large-scale military undertaking that the US launched in April of 2014, right after Crimea voted to join Russia, as a demonstration of “continued US commitment to the collective security of Europe.”

    NATO describes the buildup along Russia’s borders as a defensive measure justified by Moscow’s alleged involvement in the Ukrainian crisis.



    Abrams and Bradleys Being Deployed in Poland
    Published on Jan 13, 2017
    Abrams and Bradleys Deployment in Poland
    Video credits:Capt. Scott Kuhn / Staff Sgt. Thanh Pham






    Already Happened@M3t4_tr0n 5h5 hours ago : Photo shows an huge amount of #Russia|n tanks and military vehicles in Rostov Oblast near #Ukraine + probable Geolocation.pic.twitter.com/bhBkLnFJST







    Conflict News@Conflicts 19h19 hours ago RUSSIA: Deployment of tanks and 3,000 US troops "threatens our interests and our security": Putin's spokesman - BBC
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38592448

    Michael Cruickshank@MJ_Cruickshank 12h12 hours ago
    Interactive map - Air defence environment between Russia and NATO in Europe. - @CSIS https://missilethreat.csis.org/russia-nato-a2ad-environment/pic.twitter.com/5NLGQoWTso




    marqs@MarQs__ 16h16 hours ago Again heavy shelling in multiple places in eastern #Ukraine today, especially this evening

    marqs@MarQs__ 16h16 hours ago
    #Pervomaysk, #Popasna, #Svitlodarsk_bulge are very active this evening + the usual hotspots

    marqs@MarQs__ 7h7 hours ago
    Russian Hybrid Army attacked Ukrainian positions 78 times yesterday - ATO HQ report

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  15. #995
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    Anti-Aircraft Missiles Deployed Around Moscow as U.S. Troops Arrive in Poland

    January 13, 2017



    Russia responded to the arrival of 3,000 U.S. troops in Poland by deploying advanced S-400 anti-aircraft missiles around Moscow.

    The UK Daily Mail quotes the Russian Defense Ministry as saying:

    The SAM combat squads of the Moscow Region aerospace forces have put the new S-400 Triumph air defense missile system into service, and have gone on combat duty for the air defense of Moscow and the central industrial region of Russia. The main task of the anti-aircraft missile troops of the Russian Aerospace Forces is air defense and protecting vital state, military, industry and energy facilities, as well as the Armed Forces troops and transport communications, from aerospace attacks.

    According to International Business Times,the Defense Ministry plans to deploy four more units equipped with S-400 launchers later this year.

    The UK Independent reports that the first deployment will take up positions in Podolsk, 15 miles south of Moscow. The Russians announced that S-400s would be deployed to Kaliningrad, near the Polish and Lithuanian borders, in November — a position that would give them the ability to target NATO aircraft over most of the Baltic region.

    The Independent observes that Russian officials gave no indication of which “enemy” they expected to launch airstrikes on vital infrastructure around Moscow.

    On Friday, Chinese government media reported that China and Russia are working together on “countermeasures” to the THAAD anti-missile system the United States is deploying in South Korea, to defend against North Korean threats.

    “China and Russia urged the United States and South Korea to address their security concerns and stop the deployment of THAAD on the Korean Peninsula,” read a joint statement quoted by Reuters.

    Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said on Friday:

    We think the US-South Korean decision to deploy the THAAD missile defense system has seriously threatened China’s security interest. For the region, it will also break the strategic balance. So it’s completely understandable to see countries in the region firmly oppose this decision. China and other countries have to address our own legitimate security concerns and take necessary measures to safeguard our security interest.

    The Chinese and Russians conducted a joint anti-missile drill in May and are planning another for 2017. The point of expressing their anxiety over an anti-missile system with anti-missile drills is that China and Russia frequently accuse the U.S. and Europeans of plotting to launch aggressive strikes from behind their missile shields.

    Also, Reuters notes the Chinese and Russians have expressed concerns about the powerful radar of the THAAD system compromising their security.

    CNN cites analysts who say the Chinese foreign policy establishment sees THAAD as a threat to the region on par with North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. In essence, the Chinese and Russians worry that the U.S. is building an anti-missile and anti-aircraft fence around them.

  16. #996
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....



    This may have been why the bunker drills were all over Russia in the fall getting geared up for nuclear war and why China is getting worked up now.

    This NDAA report that took a couple of years to compile was due to be delivered by 1-15-17.

    Everyone assumed HRC would have been the next President.

    My concern is the fact most know our military is woefully unprepared, but its our US civil defense that is totally non-existent.

    We are having riots now with full bellied Fifth Column Leftist.

    We couldn't sustain disruptions here, our inner cities would quickly descend into chaos like during Katrina...but everywhere.

    And why would you take both Russia and China on at once? More importantly why would you put them both on notice with this nuclear strategic first strike report after 8 years of Obama eroding our military's readiness and down grading our nuclear deterrents knowing they've quietly been making huge strides in military readiness in many areas including nuclear ballistic missiles?

    If you go there then you better be thinking about all their surrogates around the globe creating a multinational force capable of fielding millions on the battlefield, especially the strategic ones to our south they would use to help penetrate our border states.

    Then did they consider what fighting a multinational axis force inside the CONUS would involve? Russian forces pushing down from the North and boarding the East coast. Asian forces penetrating the West Coast including Central and South American forces combined with Middle East fighters pushing up from border states, including Florida from Cuba.

    What about Alaska? My thinking would be it's the first to be boarded after the nuclear show. What would happen to Alaskans in a state Russia has openly said they believe belongs to them that needs to be repatriated and repopulate with Russians. This may possibly be what all the recent Russian Arctic military activity is about.

    Hawaii would be quickly taken intact by Asian forces.

    What would even a post war partial occupation look like inside the CONUS?

    I remember Jeff Nyquist said he spoke to someone in the Military privy to war games being run in the late 1990s or early 2000s.

    In one of the scenarios they did war games with both Russia and China (Clinton's best friends), the US lost back then...with them both being much weaker militarily. I will put up what I can find in the next post.


    H.R. 4909, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

    Floor Situation

    On Tuesday, May 17, 2015, the House will begin consideration of H.R. 4909, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017, under a structured rule.

    The bill was introduced on April 12, 2016 by Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), and was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, which ordered the bill reported, as amended, on April 28, 2016 by a vote 60 to 2.

    https://policy.house.gov/legislative...scal-year-2017


    U.S. Reviews Nuclear Strike Survival for Russia and China



    • Intelligence agency, Pentagon study resiliency of governments
    • Report mandated by Congress in bill predating Trump presidency


    U.S. intelligence agencies and the Pentagon’s Strategic Command are working on a new evaluation of whether the Russian and Chinese leadership could survive a nuclear strike and keep operating, even as President Donald Trump seeks to reshape relations with both nations.


    The new study, ordered by Congress before Trump took office, drew bipartisan support from members who harbor deep concern about China’s increasing military boldness and distrust of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intentions.

    While Trump has pledged to “greatly strengthen and expand” U.S. nuclear capabilities, he also has predicted he can make deals with Putin that may include reducing U.S. sanctions in return for future cuts in nuclear arsenals. The two leaders talked by phone for about an hour on Saturday.


    Under the little-noticed provision in this year’s defense authorization measure, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the U.S. Strategic Command -- which plans and would execute nuclear strikes -- will evaluate the post-attack capabilities of the two nuclear powers. The law mandates a report on Russian and Chinese “leadership survivability, command and control and continuity of government programs.”

    The review is to include “the location and description of above and underground facilities important to the political and military” leadership and which facilities various senior leaders “are expected to operate out of during crisis and wartime.”
    U.S.’s Own Plans

    The Strategic Command is also directed to “provide a detailed description” for “how leadership survivability” and “command and control” in Russia and China are factored into the U.S.’s own nuclear war planning. The directive was championed by Republican Representative Michael Turner of Ohio, a member of the House Armed Service Committee’s Strategic Forces panel.

    “Our experts are drafting an appropriate response,” Navy Captain Brook DeWalt, a spokesman for the Strategic Command, said in an e-mail. While “it’s premature to pass along any details at this point, we can update you further at a later date.”

    Trump has signaled support for upgrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In a memorandum on Friday, he ordered Defense Secretary James Mattis to “initiate a new Nuclear Posture Review to ensure that the United States nuclear deterrent is modern, robust, flexible, resilient, ready, and appropriately tailored to deter 21st-century threats and reassure our allies.”

    The government already was planning what arms control advocates say may be a trillion-dollar modernization of the air-sea-land triad over 30 years starring in the mid-2020s when operations and support are included. Those plans were approved under former President Barack Obama.

    “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes,” Trump wrote in a Dec. 22 Twitter posting. Also in December, Mika Brzezinski, co-host of MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ show, said Trump told her in a phone call: “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.”

    In addition, Trump and his national security team have vowed to confront China on issues from trade to its territorial claims in the South China Sea.
    ‘Doomsday Clock’

    Last week, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists cited “nuclear volatility” along with climate change as reasons it has moved up its symbolic “Doomsday Clock” by 30 seconds to two and a half minutes to midnight, the closest to a potential global disaster since 1953.

    Representative Turner said in an e-mail that the U.S. “must understand how China and Russia intend to fight a war and how their leadership will command and control a potential conflict. This knowledge is pivotal to our ability to deter the threat.”

    Russia and China “have invested considerable effort and resources into understanding how we fight, including how to interfere with our leadership’s communication capabilities,” he said. “We must not ignore gaps in our understanding of key adversary capabilities.”

    Targeting “leadership and relocation locations is part of long-standing U.S. strategy to make clear that potential enemy leaders understand they cannot win a nuclear war,” Franklin Miller, a former senior Pentagon official who served under seven defense secretaries and as the National Security Council’s senior director for defense policy and arms control, said in an interview.

    Command Bunkers


    Because such issues have been part of U.S. nuclear planning for decades, Turner is probably raising more specific issues he can’t talk about publicly, Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said in an e-mail.

    Nuclear leaders in Russia and China “plan to direct nuclear forces from inside command bunkers buried deeply beneath the earth or deeply inside mountains,” said Bruce Blair, a Princeton University research scholar on nuclear security policy and co-founder of Global Zero, a group devoted to eliminating nuclear weapons.

    Turner’s statement implies that “deterring them requires U.S. strategic cruise missiles that can maneuver around the mountains to strike the bunkers from any angle,” Blair said.


    Report: U.S. Studying If Russian, Chinese Leaders Could Survive Nuclear Strike



    by Edwin Mora31 Jan 20178

    The U.S. government is working on a new report, mandated by legislation signed into law before President Donald Trump took office, to evaluate whether the Russian and Chinese leadership have the capacity to survive a nuclear strike.

    U.S. intelligence agencies and the Pentagon’s Strategic Command are putting together the study, reports Bloomberg, noting that the effort garnered “bipartisan support from members who harbor deep concern about China’s increasing military boldness and distrust of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intentions.”

    The evaluation is mandated by the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), signed into law by former President Barack Obama.

    Michael Turner (R-Ohio), a member of the House Armed Service Subcommittee for Strategic Forces, sponsored the provision.

    The U.S. “must understand how China and Russia intend to fight a war and how their leadership will command and control a potential conflict. This knowledge is pivotal to our ability to deter the threat,” Rep. Turner told Bloomberg.

    He added that the two nuclear powers “have invested considerable effort and resources into understanding how we fight, including how to interfere with our leadership’s communication capabilities. We must not ignore gaps in our understanding of key adversary capabilities.”

    The NDAA directs the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and U.S. Strategic Command, charged with planning and executing nuclear strikes, to evaluate the post-attack capabilities of China and Russia.

    Furthermore, the law orders the U.S. intelligence community and the Pentagon to compile “a report on the leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities with respect to the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation, respectively.”

    Among various other requirements, the review is expected to include:
    An assessment of the size and scope of such activities, including the location and description of above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities of each respective country…An identification of which facilities various senior political and military leaders of each respective country are expected to operate out of during crisis and wartime
    […]
    An identification of key officials and organizations of each respective country involved in managing and operating such facilities, programs, and activities, including the command structure for each organization involved in such programs and activities.

    Moreover, the U.S. Strategic Command is mandated to “provide a detailed description for how the leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities” China and Russia “are considered” in America’s own nuclear war plans.

    A Strategic Command spokesman indicated to Bloomberg the military is working on the evaluation.

    “Our experts are drafting an appropriate response,” revealed Navy Capt. Brook DeWalt, the spokesman. While “it’s premature to pass along any details at this point, we can update you further at a later date.”

    The new commander-in-chief has expressed a willingness to strengthen America’s nuclear capabilities.
    The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 22, 2016

    “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes,” President Trump wrote on Twitter last month.

    In a memo issued Friday, the president ordered U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis to “initiate a new Nuclear Posture Review to ensure that the United States nuclear deterrent is modern, robust, flexible, resilient, ready, and appropriately tailored to deter 21st-century threats and reassure our allies.”

    Obama has already approved a “modernization of the air-sea-land triad over 30 years starting in the mid-2020s when operations and support are included,” notes Bloomberg.


    Congress Wants To Know If The US Could Best China, Russia In A Nuclear War

    Ryan Pickrell
    6:20 PM 01/30/2017

    U.S. intelligence agencies are evaluating the respective Russian and Chinese capabilities to survive a nuclear war, as well as those of the United States.

    Congress has directed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and U.S. Strategic Command, through the National Defense Authorization Act of the Fiscal Year 2017, to report on Russian and Chinese “leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities” in the event of a nuclear strike.

    The directive was pushed forward by Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio).

    The U.S. “must understand how China and Russia intend to fight a war and how their leadership will command and control a potential conflict. This knowledge is pivotal to our ability to deter the threat,” Turner told Bloomberg.

    Russia and China “have invested considerable effort and resources into understanding how we fight, including how to interfere with our leadership’s communication capabilities,” he added.

    “We must not ignore gaps in our understanding of key adversary capabilities,” he concluded.

    The intelligence review is required to identify “which facilities various senior political and military leaders of each respective country are expected to operate out of during crisis and wartime,” “location and description of above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability,” and “key officials and organizations of each respective country involved in managing and operating such facilities, programs, and activities.”

    “Our experts are drafting an appropriate response,” Navy Captain Brook DeWalt, a spokesman for U.S. Strategic Command, told Bloomberg.

    “We need to strengthen the military potential of strategic nuclear forces, especially with missile complexes that can reliably penetrate any existing and prospective missile defense systems,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in December. He said that Russian forces should be able to “neutralize any military threat.”

    China should “build more strategic nuclear arms and accelerate the deployment of the DF-41 intercontinental ballistic missile,” China’s nationalist Global Times said in December.

    Last week, Chinese reports indicated that China had deployed its nuclear-capable DF-41s in response to President Donald Trump’s “provocative remarks.”

    The request predates Trump’s election; however, it appears consistent with his intentions for enhancing the power of the U.S. military.

    “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes,” Trump tweeted in late December.

    Trump instructed Secretary of Defense General James Mattis to “initiate a new Nuclear Posture Review to ensure that the United States nuclear deterrent is modern, robust, flexible, resilient, ready, and appropriately tailored to deter 21st-century threats and reassure our allies” Friday.

    At the same time, Trump hopes that he can reshape relations with both China and Russia.

    SHOCK CLAIM: United States 'is plotting surprise NUCLEAR ATTACK on China AND Russia'


    THE United States could be planning a surprise nuclear attack on China and Russia, a former US Army major has warned.

    By Katie Mansfield


    US Congress has ordered a study into the “political and military leadership survivability” of China and Russia during wartime.

    The report could be interpreted as a signal the US is preparing for a preemptive strike on the two nations, according to military analysts.

    US intelligence agencies and Strategic Command, which is in charge of US nuclear forces, will carry out the study, a report says.

    That’s the reason for this study: to ensure we wipe out their command and control with a first strike
    Retired US Army major Todd Pierce
    Retired US Army major Todd Pierce told Russian state media Sputnik: “No other nation-state has any intent of attacking us except if they should survive our initial ‘preemptive attack’, they can be expected to retaliate the best they are able.

    “That’s the reason for this study: to ensure we wipe out their command and control with a first strike.”

    According to a conference report of the National Defense Authorization Act 2017 (NDAA), Congress has ordered a “report on Russian and Chinese political and military leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities”.

    The report called for the Director of National Intelligence to submit the study to congressional committees by January 15, five days before Donald Trump took office.

    The NDAA said the report should identify where senior political and military leaders in China and Russia are “expected to operate during crisis and wartime” as well.

    It should also assess the location of “above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities”.



    The report could be interpreted as a signal the US is preparing for a preemptive strike



    Donald Trump spoke on the phone to Vladimir Putin on Saturday

    Mr Pierce said the report could be explained by the US wanting to explore the possibility of wiping out Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping in a sudden attack.

    He insisted the study is not a defensive move but “typical American double talk when we are in the process of planning offensive military operations”.

    Former CIA officer Phil Giraldi echoed Mr Pierce’s view that the study is part of a comprehensive assessment routinely made by military intelligence agencies.

    Do these photos show America preparing for war with Russia?

    Wed, January 18, 2017 A photographer has captured what he says is an F-16 jet practicing dogfights with a mysterious Russian fighter plane – before returning to Area 51.



    Mr Giraldi said: “I think it's routine contingency planning as I see no evidence that it was initiated personally by any of the identifiable hawks.”

    He added the US Department of Defense has prepared plans for all contingencies including the most improbable.

    Mr Giraldi said: “I'm sure the Pentagon has even worked up a plan and assessment regarding what would happen if we were to invade Canada. Didn't work out too well in 1812.”
    It comes as the Kremlin said a phone call between Mr Trump and Mr Putin on Saturday went well signalling US-Russia relations could thaw under the new US president.

    But Washington has seen tensions with Beijing escalate over disputed islands in the South China Sea.

    China said it has "irrefutable" sovereignty over the islands as the White House vowed to defend "international territories" in the strategic waterway.


    These are Reasons Behind US Examining Russia and China's Nuclear 'Survivability'

    © REUTERS/ Shannon Stapleton
    PoliticsGet short URL
    364266619

    The United States intelligence community and the Pentagon’s Strategic Command (STRATCOM) are working on a report evaluating the probability of the Russian and Chinese leadership to survive in the event of a nuclear strike, according to a section of the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

    The review was commissioned by Congress before Donald Trump’s inauguration as US President. The initiative was endorsed by Democratic and Republican representatives.


    © Wikipedia/


    US Study on 'Decapitating' Russia, China May Raise Fear of Surprise Nuke Attack

    World

    By such an "extraordinary move," congressmen showed off their mistrust towards the Russian government and concerns over China’s growing military power, according to Russian political analyst and commentator Alexander Khrolenko.

    Congress wants the study to contain thorough descriptions of "the location and description of above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities of each respective country."

    "This is not the first time that US political veterans demonstrate confidence in American exceptionalism. This would be ridiculous if the US didn’t have an arsenal of over 7,000 nuclear warheads and a bad reputation," Khrolenko wrote in a piece for RIA Novosti.

    Reacting to the situation, President Donald Trump on Monday accused hawkish Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham of "looking to start World War III."

    So, why does Washington want to have an updated report on Russia and China’s nuclear strike survivability?

    Strategic Synergy and Preventive Tactic

    Washington understands that projection of Moscow and Beijing’s economic, military and political interests beyond their borders will sooner or later lead to a confrontation with American interests.


    © Wikipedia/
    Trump Orders Nuclear Posture Review, Enhanced Ballistic Missile Capabilities

    Russia has an arsenal of 1,790 nuclear warheads on alert, and China has 260. Meanwhile, the US has 1,930 such warheads.

    Modernization of strategic arsenals has recently been running on all cylinders. Moscow is currently enhancing the naval and ground-based components of the military triad. Beijing places bets on mobile missile systems. Washington is sending troops and weapons to Europe. Moreover, Russia, China and the US are building a network of underground communications facilities in the event of a nuclear war.

    Despite the fact that China does not want to be bound by certain political and military obligations with Russia, Beijing-Moscow bilateral strategic ties can be characterized by a positive dynamic and intense cooperation on all levels.

    "In order to counter the contemporary threats, China and Russia are developing military and technical cooperation. This is not only about arms sales. Moscow and Beijing have a common geopolitical space, a possible battlefield, and coordinates positions on security issues in Southeastern and Central Asia and in the Middle East. External military and political pressure contributes to consolidation Russia’s and Beijing’s positions," the author pointed out.



    © Flickr/ National Museum of the U.S. Navy
    Pentagon Awards $54Mln for Production of Trident Nuclear Missile Guidance System

    According to Khrolenko, the most rational response by Moscow and Beijing to the mounting nuclear threat is "further political rapprochement and a synergy of defensive capabilities."

    "Preventive measures cannot be ruled out either. We can assume that Russia and China’s strategic nuclear forces de facto would cover for each other and to a certain extent duplicate each other. Possibly, in theory, a nuclear strike against Russia would mean not only a responsive strike, but also a preventive strike by China (and vice versa if China is attacked first)," the article read.

    Trade, Not War


    © AFP 2016/ CHRIS KLEPONIS
    Tillerson: US Should Continue Engagement With Russia Under New START Treaty

    The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START II) between Moscow and Washington was signed on January 3, 1993. The
    agreement was expected to reduce US and Russia’s strategic arsenals by two-thirds by 2003. The treaty limited the number of nuclear warheads at 3,000-3,500 in each of the countries by 2003.

    After the US withdrew from the agreement on June 13, 2002, Moscow announced that it would no longer consider itself bound by START II. At the time, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that due to Washington’s actions Moscow could not see any preconditions for the treaty to come into force.

    "Currently, nine countries around the world have accumulated over 15,000 nuclear warheads. Even the most optimistic scenario of a nuclear war says that the global civilization would collapse into oases in the desert," Khrolenko wrote.

    The author underscored that the "obsolete strategy" of developing one country at expense of other countries is "suicidal" in the 21st century.

    "Washington spends billions of dollars a year on weapons. According to Western estimates, Russia’s military spending increased from 3.6 percent of GDP in 2005 to 5.4 percent in 2015. Wouldn’t it be better to use this money and this political will to develop economies, global trade and space exploration? For the majority of people, peaceful cooperation and trade are a better deal than wars," the article read.


    © Sputnik/ Alexander Vilf
    Ex-Soviet Leader Gorbachev Calls on US, Russia to Lead Efforts Preventing Nuclear War

    In a recent article for Forbes, journalist Kenneth Rapoza stressed that Russia is a profitable economic and trade partner.

    "Russia has survived sanctions. It survived $35 oil. And it survived two years of recession. Say what you will about Vladimir Putin, Russia's economic management team has got its stuff together. […] If all goes well, Russia hits 1.7% GDP growth this year," Rapoza wrote.

    "Bombing a profitable economic partner doesn’t make sense. By evaluating Russia’s and China’s nuclear survivability, the US, first of all, wants to assess its own chances to survive in this world," Khrolenko concluded.


    'Dead Hand' and Bunkers: This is How Russia Can Survive Potential Nuclear Attack

    © Sputnik/ Sergei Malgavko
    RussiaGet short URL
    3413008712

    United States intelligence and Strategic Command (STRATCOM) are working on a report evaluating the probability of the Russian and Chinese leadership to survive in the event of a nuclear strike, according to a section of the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).


    © Flickr/ International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
    Congress Commissions Study on What Would Happen if US Preemptively Nuked Russia

    Congress wants the document to contain descriptions of "the location and description of above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability, command and control, and continuity of government programs and activities of each respective country." Meanwhile, on Friday, Trump ordered the Pentagon to prepare another document, a Nuclear Posture Review, aimed at assessing the readiness of the US nuclear deterrence forces.

    Previously, Trump hinted at the possible removal of anti-Russian sanctions in exchange for a bilateral nuclear arms reduction agreement.

    US Examining Russia’s Nuclear 'Survivability'

    Back in the early-1970s, the Soviet Union created the Perimeter System, known as Dead Hand in the US and Europe.
    "This system duplicated the functions of a command post automatically triggering the launch of the Russian nuclear missiles if the country’s leadership was destroyed by a nuclear strike," Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, told the Russian online newspaper Vzglyad.


    © REUTERS/ Shannon Stapleton
    'Exceptionalism and a Bad Reputation': Reasons Behind US Examining Russia and China's Nuclear 'Survivability'

    Moreover, in the early-1970s, the Chinese government was seriously concerned over a possible nuclear conflict with the USSR. "As for China’s nuclear defense system, there was no serious defense under Mao Zedong. China simply built nuclear shelters for members of the political bureau and even for local leadership," Ivashov noted.

    In 1981, shortly after his inauguration, US President Ronald Raegan received a report from the CIA on the survivability of the Soviet people and the Soviet leadership in the event of disastrous climate changes as well as a nuclear strike.

    "At the time, the Americans decided that the Soviet Union was the most nuclear-proof country, especially such its territories as Siberia, Altai and Kazakhstan. Thus, Raegan approved a 10-year plan to destroy the Soviet Union. A preventive nuclear strike was in consideration. Soviet intelligence was aware of the plans, and Moscow began building bunkers for workers and the leadership. A system of bunkers known as the Grot System was created," the expert said.

    In 1983, Raegan received a new report saying that the Soviet strategic management system was more stable than its American analogue.


    © Wikipedia/
    Trump Orders Nuclear Posture Review, Enhanced Ballistic Missile Capabilities

    "Then, Washington decided that soft power would be more effective on the standoff between the US and the USSR, rather than a nuclear or conventional war," Ivashov added. The modernization of Soviet-era nuclear defense systems began during the presidency of Boris Yeltsin (1991-1999). Significant progress was also made during Vladimir Putin’s presidency, including expanding the life support systems’ capacity to three months.

    According to Ivashov, after 2000, Washington approved the conception of a rapid global strike, and, as a result, stopped to modernize its strategic nuclear arsenal.

    "The US focused on the conception of a highly accurate strike, with the following use of tactical weapons. Moreover, the US adopted the global missile shield plan," Ivashov explained.

    The recently announced review will be followed by a new report for President Trump. The expert stressed that certain measures against Russia’s management infrastructure may be possible.

    "I don’t think this would be a nuclear strike. But they may consider a cyber-attack, including against the banking system and other critical infrastructure," Ivashov said.


    © Sputnik/ Alexander Vilf
    Ex-Soviet Leader Gorbachev Calls on US, Russia to Lead Efforts Preventing Nuclear War

    According to political analyst Igor Nikolaichuk, such evaluation is routine and such reports are regularly prepared and updated under the national nuclear program. "Those plans are the sacred part of the US military doctrine. This is why they need to be reviewed and updated from time to time," Nikolaichuk told Radio Sputnik.

    The analyst also commented on Trump’s order to examine the US nuclear potential.

    "As for the strategic nuclear forces, each president would try to do his best to ensure their effectiveness. By examining Russia’s survivability in the event of a nuclear strike, Washington will try to weaken Russia’s strategic nuclear forces. But this is a normal goal for the President of the United States," Nikolaichuk pointed out.

    'Everyone Understands the Threat of a Nuclear War'

    Director of the Center for Military Forecast Anatoly Tsyganok reminded that the CIA, the Pentagon and other US intelligence services had been monitoring the situation in the Soviet Union since the 1950s.

    "By the end of 1961, Washington considered strikes against the 10 main targets in the USSR, including Moscow, Novosibirsk, Tyumen and Sverdlovsk [Yekaterinburg]. But after 1961, such an option was never even discussed, because the US knew that the Soviet Union had a system for a retaliation nuclear strike," Tsyganok was quoted as saying by Vzglyad.

    The expert suggested that the examination was initiated before Donald Trump’s inauguration as US president.
    "Everyone understands the threat of a nuclear war. One should not forget that the US and Russia have nearly 90 percent of all nuclear bombs and equipment in the world," he said.


    © Sputnik/ Sergey Malgavko
    On Alert: Top Notch S-400 System in Crimea Achieves Full Operational Readiness

    Military and political expert Ivan Konovalov underscored that usually a nuclear state can secure the survival of its leadership but the potential aggressor may try to conduct a sudden strike at a time the leaders cannot be protected.

    "All nuclear powers, especially the leading ones, have life support systems in the event of a crisis. But the efficiency of a nuclear strike also depends on where and when it can be conducted against the leadership," Konovalov said.

    In turn, retired Lt. Gen. Aytech Bizhev underscored that the survivability of the national leadership is also ensured by the country’s missile defense shield.

    "There are missile defense system and nuclear attack alert systems. No missile launch by other countries’ strategic forces can go unnoticed by those systems," Bizhev said.

    Dungeons of Moscow

    All data regarding bunkers for the Russian leadership in the event of a nuclear war are classified. All secret bunkers and cities are overseen by the Federal Security Service (FSB) and the Main Presidential Directorate for Special Programs.
    Nevertheless, some Soviet-era secret facilities have been recently declassified, including, for example, the so-called Brezhnev’s Bunker in Moscow. Currently, there is a museum inside the facility.


    © Photo: JSC Russian Railways
    Russia to Conduct Flight Tests of Missile for 'Nuclear Train' in 2019

    Initially, the bunker was designed a nuclear shelter for the Soviet establishment. It was constructed in 1956 and located 50 meters below ground. However, by the time, it was decided to build another shelter for the Soviet leadership, and the facility housed the long-range aviation command staff. It is also known that the buildings of the Russian Defense Ministry and armed service branches have underground facilities, but they are authorized personnel only.

    Declassified archives of the Committee for State Security (KGB) can also shed some light on Soviet secret bunkers. For example, according to those files, an underground city with a capacity of 15,000 people was built in Ramenki District, in Moscow. It had autonomous power generating, air and water supplying systems.

    US Congress orders review of Russian & Chinese leadership’s nuclear strike ‘survivability’


    Get short URL


    FILE PHOTO: A Trident II, or D-5 missile, is launched from an Ohio-class submarine © Reuters

    The US Congress has directed intelligence agencies and the Pentagon’s Strategic Command to evaluate the ‘survivability’ of Russian and Chinese leaders in the event of a nuclear strike on their aboveground and underground defense facilities.

    The comprehensive study will be carried out by the US intelligence agencies as well as the Strategic Command, which is in charge of the American nuclear forces. They will evaluate whether the Russian and Chinese leadership could survive a nuclear attack and continue to operate in a post-strike environment, according to a little-reported section of the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).


    If we are in arms race, US started it by pulling out of ABM treaty – Putin


    The review will include “an identification of which facilities various senior political and military leaders of each respective country are expected to operate out of during crisis and wartime,” as well as the “location and description of above-ground and underground facilities important to the political and military leadership survivability.

    “Key officials and organizations of each respective country involved in managing and operating such facilities, programs, and activities” should also be identified, says the document, which is somewhat reminiscent of an elaborate war plan.
    “Our experts are drafting an appropriate response,” Navy Captain Brook DeWalt, spokesman for the Strategic Command, said in an email to Bloomberg on Monday. While “it’s premature to pass along any details at this point, we can update you further at a later date.”

    Although the study was ordered before Donald Trump took office, it appears to coincide with his statement that he would unconditionally support strengthening US strategic arsenals. In an incendiary tweet in December, Trump wrote that Washington “must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”

    Later in the month, Trump stunned arms control experts, reportedly telling Mika Brzezinski, co-host of MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ program: “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.”

    The remarks came despite Trump’s separate statement that he would consider a rapprochement with Moscow in response for a possible new deal on nuclear arms reduction.

    China reportedly deploys ICBMs near Russia’s border

    While seemingly opaque, Trump’s comments left many to speculate as to whom his threats of a renewed arms race were directed against. Currently, Russia is the only country that can match the US in terms of nuclear strategic capabilities in both size and quality, with Moscow’s nuclear triad believed to be enough to bring about so-called ‘mutually assured destruction.’

    Congressman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said in an email to Bloomberg that the US “must understand how China and Russia intend to fight a war and how their leadership will command and control a potential conflict. This knowledge is pivotal to our ability to deter the threat.”

    The US and Russia possess roughly 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, while most of them are many times more powerful than the American atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. A single nuclear warhead, if detonated on a large city, could result in millions of fatalities, with contamination effects persisting for decades.
    How is the #DoomsdayClock set? Read about it in Doomsday Clockwork: https://t.co/dq1T6HX3ydpic.twitter.com/fSePSPjgzx
    — BulletinOfTheAtomic (@BulletinAtomic) January 28, 2017

    Last week, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists adjusted the famous ‘Doomsday Clock,’ which visualizes the perceived distance to a nuclear disaster. The hand was moved 30 seconds closer to midnight, and it now stands just 2.5 minutes away – a time unseen since 1953, when the US and USSR were designing and testing hydrogen bombs.

    “Over the course of 2016, the global security landscape darkened as the international community failed to come effectively to grips with humanity’s most pressing existential threats, nuclear weapons and climate change,” the scientists stated.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  17. #997
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    U.S. repeatedly loses in Pentagon war games against Russia

    Posted on October 4, 2015 by StMA | 11 Comments
    On Sept. 29, 2015, an op/ed by reporter Benny Avni in the New York Post proclaimed

    Vladimir Putin’s Russia as “the world’s new sole superpower.” Avni wrote:

    The baton was officially transferred Monday to the world’s new sole superpower — and Vladimir Putin willingly picked it up.

    Putin’s deployment of forces in Syria and arming of Assad create facts on the ground. They have also propelled him to the top by taking initiative on today’s most consequential world fight….That’s how Putin seized leadership from America….

    And it’s bad for America. Because sooner or later, after more bloodshed and under even worse conditions than now, our next president will be called upon to retake the leadership baton from Putin. And that could prove tricky.

    Avni’s proclamation isn’t that far-fetched given the fact that the Pentagon’s own war games show that the U.S. would lose in a Baltic war against Russia.

    Julia Ioffe writes for Foreign Policy, Sept. 18, 2015, that the Pentagon continuously generates contingency plans for every possible scenario — anything from armed confrontation with North Korea to zombie attacks.

    For the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, however, the U.S. Department of Defense is reviewing and updating its contingency plans for armed conflict with Russia, to reflect a new, post-Crimea-annexation geopolitical reality in which Russia is no longer a potential partner, but a potential threat.

    Michèle Flournoy, former undersecretary of defense for policy and co-founder of the Center for a New American Security, explains that “Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine made the U.S. dust off its contingency plans. They were pretty out of date.” Flournoy says the new plans have two tracks:


    • One focuses on what the United States can do as part of NATO if Russia attacks one of NATO’s member states.
    • The other track considers American action outside the NATO umbrella.


    Both versions of the updated contingency plans focus on Russian incursions into the Baltics, a scenario seen as the most likely front for new Russian aggression. They are also increasingly focusing not on traditional warfare, but on the hybrid tactics Russia used in Crimea and eastern Ukraine: “little green men,” manufactured protests, and cyberwarfare. Julie Smith, who until recently served as Vice President Joe Biden’s deputy national security advisor, says: “They are trying to figure out in what circumstances [the U.S. Defense Department] would respond to a cyberattack. There’s a lively debate on that going on right now.”

    It was in February 2014 that Putin caught the Obama administration off guard by sending little green men into Crimea and eastern Ukraine. David Ochmanek, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for force development, said, “We didn’t plan for it because we didn’t think Russia would change the borders in Europe.” Crimea was a “surprise.”

    In June 2014, a month after he had left his force-planning job at the Pentagon, the Air Force asked Ochmanek for advice on Russia. At the same time, the Army had approached one of Ochmanek’s colleagues at Rand, and the two teamed up to run a thought exercise called a “table top,” a sort of war game between two teams: the red team (Russia) and the blue team (NATO). The scenario was similar to the one that played out in Crimea and eastern Ukraine: increasing Russian political pressure on Estonia and Latvia (two NATO countries that share borders with Russia and have sizable Russian-speaking minorities), followed by the appearance of provocateurs, demonstrations, and the seizure of government buildings.

    “Our question was: Would NATO be able to defend those countries?,” Ochmanek recalls.

    The results were dispiriting. Given the recent reductions in the defense budgets of NATO member countries and U.S. pullback from the region, Ochmanek says the NATO team was outnumbered 2-to-1 in terms of manpower, even if all the U.S. and NATO troops stationed in Europe were dispatched to the Baltics — including the 82nd Airborne, which is supposed to be ready to go on 24 hours’ notice and is based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

    “We just don’t have those forces in Europe,” Ochmanek explains. Then there’s the fact that the Russians have the world’s best surface-to-air missiles and are not afraid to use heavy artillery.

    After eight hours of gaming out various scenarios, “the conclusion,” Ochmanek says, “was that we are unable to defend the Baltics.

    Ochmanek decided to run the game on a second day. The teams played the game again, this time working on the assumption that the United States and NATO had already started making positive changes to their force posture in Europe. Would anything be different? The conclusion was slightly more upbeat, but not by much. “We can defend the capitals, we can present Russia with problems, and we can take away the prospect of a coup de main,” Ochmanek says. “But the dynamic remains the same.” Even without taking into account the recent U.S. defense cuts, due to sequestration, and the Pentagon’s plan to downsize the Army by 40,000 troops, the logistics of distance were still daunting. U.S. battalions would still take anywhere from one to two months to mobilize and make it across the Atlantic, and the Russians, Ochmanek notes, “can do a lot of damage in that time.

    Ochmanek has run the two-day table-top exercise eight times now, including at the Pentagon and at Ramstein Air Base, in Germany, with active-duty military officers. “We played it 16 different times with eight different teams,” Ochmanek says, “always with the same conclusion.

    When asked about Ochmanek’s conclusions, a Defense Department official expressed confidence that, eventually, NATO would claw the territory back. “In the end, I have no doubt that NATO will prevail and that we will restore the territorial integrity of any NATO member,” the official said. “I cannot guarantee that it will be easy or without great risk. My job is to ensure that we can reduce that risk.”

    That is, the Pentagon does not envision a scenario in which Russia doesn’t manage to grab some Baltic territory first. The goal is to deter — Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced this summer that the United States would be sending dozens of tanks, armored vehicles, and howitzers to the Baltics and Eastern Europe — and, if that fails, to painstakingly regain NATO territory.

    The Pentagon is also chewing on various hybrid warfare scenarios, and even a nuclear one. The senior defense official says, “As you look at published Russian doctrine, I do believe people are thinking about use of tactical nuclear weapons in a way that hadn’t been thought about for many years . . . . The doctrine clearly talks about it, so it would be irresponsible . . . to at least not be thinking through those issues. Any time there is nuclear saber rattling, it is always a concern, no matter where it comes from.”



    Note
    :
    German public television ZDF reports on Sept. 22, 2015, thatthe U.S. will station 20 new atomic weapons, B61-12, in Germany. Each B61-12 has four times the destructive power of the one that was used on Hiroshima in 1945. “With the new bombs the boundaries blur between tactical and strategic nuclear weapons,” Hans Kristensen, the Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, told ZDF.

    There is a strong element of disappointment among senior foreign-policy and security officials in these discussions, of disbelief that we ended up here after all those good years in America’s relations with Russia.

    The State Department official says: “A lot of people at the Pentagon are unhappy about the confrontation. They were very happy with the military-to-military cooperation with Russia.” Some think that Russia is a distraction from the real threat — China. Others think that working with Russia on arms control is more important than protecting Ukrainian sovereignty. Not only would they rather not have to think about Moscow as an enemy, but many are also miffed that even making these plans plays right into Putin’s paranoid fantasies about a showdown between Russia and NATO or between Russia and the United States — which makes those fantasies, de facto, a reality. In the U.S. planning for confrontation with Russia, says the Senate staffer, Putin “is getting the thing he always wanted.”

    In his July confirmation hearing to ascend to the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph Dunford said that Russia posed an “existential threat” to the United States and that America must do more to prepare itself for hybrid warfare of the type Russia deployed in Ukraine. Dunford’s statement angered the Obama White House, which saw it as potentially provocative to Moscow.

    The fact that U.S. repeatedly lost in the Pentagon’s own war games against Russia could explain why, according to a Sept. 25, 2015 article on the Russian news site, SvetKolemnas.Info, a “summary report of the Russian Ministry of Defense for the internal needs of the Kremlin” states that within three weeks after President Putin orders a “first strike” against America and its NATO allies, the military forces of the Russian Federation will achieve “a total defeat” of U.S. military forces, including:


    • The destruction of all 18 US aircraft carriers and ships capable of carrying aircraft, and of all US and NATO military satellites.
    • The strategic takeover of heavy weapons.
    • The “erasing” of all US bases in the UK.
    • The total loss of US and NATO troops of over 35,000 (dead, wounded, captured and missing), and material losses of at least 15 trillion dollars (ships, aircraft, weapons, etc.)


    The report envisions that after Russia achieved tactical superiority over US and NATO forces during the first 24 hours of the war, Moscow would issue a demand for the removal of all US forces, nuclear weapons and equipment from Europe, in exchange for a cessation of hostilities.

    If the demand is met, Russian forces would then withdraw from the conquered territories. If the request is rejected, the forces of the Russian Federation would deploy tactical nuclear weapons against US military bases and NATO in Europe, as well as EMP/electronic weapons against the United States and Canada. Russia would also be prepared to use intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). Fearing total global nuclear war, the US and the EU would immediately lose the political will to fight.

    The Russian Ministry of Defense report also states that tens of millions of American Christians could very well act as a “fifth column” in support of the Russian Federation, given that those Christians have had “to defend against their own ‘demonic’ leaders destroying America.” American Christians would side with the Christian forces of the Russian Federation who only seek to liberate the United States, Europe and the rest of the world from those demonic leaders’ “satanic design.”

    In this manner, with the “fifth column” of Christian Americans supporting Christian Russia, a global nuclear disaster would be averted, and the United States under a new Christian leadership could then return to a peaceful way of life and “cease terrorizing the world.”



    This image is in the SvetKolemnas.Info article

    The report notes that, according to CNN, the readiness of the US military is now at a historic low, with half of U.S. Marine Corps units at below the level of military preparedness. The report further sites a U.S. blog, Fellowship of the Minds, on the mass exodus of Christians from the US military. All of which has rendered a once-fearsome military increasingly dysfunctional because of the Obama regime’s sex/gender experimentation, including American cadets being forced to march in high heels as part of their education, and Obama’s appointment of “Erica [sic] K. Fanning, an open homosexual, as Commander of the US Army.” Note: Last month, Obama nominated Eric Fanning, an admitted homosexual, to be Army Secretary. (See “Obama names open homosexual to be Secretary of U.S. Army“)

    The report estimates that if the de-Christianized and demoralized U.S. military were to face the Christian forces of the Russian Federation, it would take only 3 weeks for the U.S. military to be drained of all their “will to fight”.
    Referring to Salon.com, “one of the most popular U.S. magazines,” now “openly supporting” sex between an adult and a child, pedophilia being just another sexual lifestyle, the SvetKolemnas.Info article cryptically concluded that “After all, things of hell belong to hell … maybe it’s time to make this monster go back where they belong.”
    See also:





    US Military's Worst Nightmare: A War with Russia and China (at the Same Time)



    What would happen?

    Robert Farley

    TweetShareShare



    The United States discarded its oft-misunderstood “two war” doctrine, intended as a template for providing the means to fight two regional wars simultaneously, late last decade. Designed to deter North Korea from launching a war while the United States was involved in fighting against Iran or Iraq (or vice versa,) the idea helped give form to the Department of Defense’s procurement, logistical and basing strategies in the post–Cold War, when the United States no longer needed to face down the Soviet threat. The United States backed away from the doctrine because of changes in the international system, including the rising power of China and the proliferation of highly effective terrorist networks.

    But what if the United States had to fight two wars today, and not against states like North Korea and Iran? What if China and Russia sufficiently coordinated with one another to engage in simultaneous hostilities in the Pacific and in Europe?

    Political Coordination

    Could Beijing and Moscow coordinate a pair of crises that would drive two separate U.S. military responses? Maybe, but probably not. Each country has its own goals, and works on its own timeline. More likely, one of the two would opportunistically take advantage of an existing crisis to further its regional claims. For example, Moscow might well decide to push the Baltic States if the United States became involved in a major skirmish in the South China Sea.

    In any case, the war would start on the initiative of either Moscow or Beijing. The United States enjoys the benefits of the status quo in both areas, and generally (at least where great powers are concerned) prefers to use diplomatic and economic means to pursue its political ends. While the U.S. might create the conditions for war, Russia or China would pull the trigger.

    Flexibility

    On the upside, only some of the requirements for fighting in Europe and the Pacific overlap. As was the case in World War II, the U.S. Army would bear the brunt of defending Europe, while the Navy would concentrate on the Pacific. The U.S. Air Force (USAF) would play a supporting role in both theaters.

    Russia lacks the ability to fight NATO in the North Atlantic, and probably has no political interest in trying. This means that while the United States and its NATO allies can allocate some resources to threatening Russia’s maritime space (and providing insurance against a Russian naval sortie,) the U.S. Navy (USN) can concentrate its forces in the Pacific.

    Depending on the length of the conflict and the degree of warning provided, the United States could transport considerable U.S. Army assets to Europe to assist with any serious fighting.

    The bulk of American carriers, submarines and surface vessels would concentrate in the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, fighting directly against China’s A2/AD system and sitting astride China’s maritime transit lanes. Long range aviation, including stealth bombers and similar assets, would operate in both theaters as needed.

    The U.S. military would be under strong pressure to deliver decisive victory in at least one theater as quickly as possible. This might push the United States to lean heavily in one direction with air, space and cyber assets, hoping to achieve a strategic and political victory that would allow the remainder of its weight to shift to the other theater. Given the strength of U.S. allies in Europe, the United States might initially focus on the conflict in the Pacific.

    Alliance Structure

    U.S. alliance structure in the Pacific differs dramatically from that of Europe. Notwithstanding concern over the commitment of specific U.S. allies in Europe, the United States has no reason to fight Russia apart from maintaining the integrity of the NATO alliance. If the United States fights, then Germany, France, Poland and the United Kingdom will follow. In most conventional scenarios, even the European allies alone would give NATO a tremendous medium term advantage over the Russians; Russia might take parts of the Baltics, but it would suffer heavily under NATO airpower, and likely couldn’t hold stolen territory for long. In this context, the USN and USAF would largely play support and coordinative roles, giving the NATO allies the advantage they needed to soundly defeat the Russians. The U.S. nuclear force would provide insurance against a Russian decision to employ tactical or strategic nuclear weapons.

    The United States faces more difficult problems in the Pacific. Japan or India might have an interest in the South China Sea, but this hardly guarantees their participation in a war (or even the degree of benevolence of their neutrality.) The alliance structure of any given conflict would depend on the particulars of that conflict; any of the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan or Taiwan could become China’s primary target. The rest, U.S. pressure aside, might well prefer to sit on the sidelines. This would put extra pressure on the United States to establish dominance in the Western Pacific with its own assets.

    Parting Shots

    The United States can still fight and win two major wars at the same time, or at least come near enough to winning that neither Russia nor China would see much hope in the gamble. The United States can do this because it continues to maintain the world’s most formidable military, and because it stands at the head of an extremely powerful military alliance. Moreover, Russia and China conveniently pose very different military problems, allowing the United States to allocate some of its assets to one, and the rest to the other.

    However, it bears emphasis that this situation will not last forever. The United States cannot maintain this level of dominance indefinitely, and in the long-term will have to choose its commitments carefully. At the same time, the United States has created an international order that benefits many of the most powerful and prosperous countries in the world; it can count on their support, for a while.

    Robert Farley, a frequent contributor to the National Interest, is author of The Battleship Book. He serves as a senior lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His work includes military doctrine, national security and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money, Information Dissemination and the Diplomat.

    Image: A B-1B Lancer soars over the Pacific Ocean as it maneuvers in for aerial refueling by a KC-135 Stratotanker on September 30, 2005. Wikimedia Commons/U.S. Air Force


    US Faces War with Both China and Russia if It Attacks Either of Them


    • Published on

    Kai Yee CHAN

    On August 26, Robert Farley, author of The Battleship Book and a senior lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky, published on National Interest an article titled “US Military's Worst Nightmare: A War with Russia and China (at the Same Time)”, in which he asks the question that plagues him: What if China and Russia sufficiently coordinated with one another to engage in simultaneous hostilities in the Pacific and in Europe? (I reblogged the article on August 30.)

    However, he does not think it likely that China and Russia may coordinate a pair of crises to drive two separate US military responses as each country has its own goal.

    He believes, “More likely, one of the two would opportunistically take advantage of an existing crisis to further its regional claims.

    For example, Moscow might well decide to push the Baltic States if the United States became involved in a major skirmish in the South China Sea.”

    In such a scenario, Europe is strong enough to deal with Russia with some support from US navy and air force. As a result the US may focus on dealing with China with almost all its navy and air force.

    The article believes that US only has to win quickly in order to transfer its force to another theater as soon as possible.

    According to current US military strength, it is indeed possible for the US to win first in Asia and then in Europe if China and Russia fight separately in two different theaters.

    However, what if China and Russia joint force in fighting the US in one theater?


    China and Russia Share a Common Goal: Resisting US Containment


    Unlike US alliance with Japan, Australia or the Philippines, there is no treaty of alliance between China and Russia, but the alliance between the two is much stronger than US alliance with its allies.

    Why?

    The US has treaty obligations to fight for Japan, Australia and the Philippines but not willingly unless its interests are being hurt; therefore, it does not send its navy to help the Philippines counter Chinese navy in the Scarborough standoff. It just uses the excuse of taking no side in the disputes.

    However, the saddest things for the US are that if the US fights a war with either China or Russia, its allies Japan, Australia and the Philippines will provide it with no substantial help as they are neither willing nor able to do so.

    China and Russia, however, have no treaty obligations to help each other in a war between the US and either of them, but will join each other to fight the US.

    When they join force, it is hard for the US to defeat them.


    They will do that out of necessity as the US is now doing its best to contain both of them so that they shall ally with each other to resist US containment. If one of them has been subdued by the US, the other will be isolated and easily subdued by the US.

    Why?

    Because their alliance is an alliance of necessity, which is much stronger than a treaty alliance.


    What necessity?

    The necessity to resist US containment of them.

    For example, if Taiwan declares independence, China tries to take Taiwan by force. The US concentrates all its navy and air force in the Pacific to save Taiwan as it believes it has legal obligation to do so. Will Russia exploit the conflict between China and US to pursue some gains in Europe?

    Not likely.

    Russia shall be clear that without its help the US may very likely subdue China.


    When the US has subdued China, the US will certainly transfer all its force to subdue Russia; therefore, whatever Russia may possibly get by exploiting the conflict will be lost after the US has subdued China.

    The conflict, however, gives Russia the golden opportunity to subdue the US jointly with China.

    If it joins force with China and has defeated the US, it will be free to get what it wants in Europe without US intervention.


    Remember, the de facto alliance between Russia and China is formed for their common goal to resist the US. That is their priority.

    For another example, if the US and its European allies attack Russia to help Ukraine or any other formal member of the Soviet Union.

    Will China be so short-sighted as to exploit the conflict for some gains in Asia?


    No, China knows well that if Russia has been subdued, China will be isolated and easily subdued.

    It has set up de facto alliance with Russia precisely for the purpose of using Russia’s strength to jointly resist the US; therefore, it sends its vast army and strong air force to Europe to help Russia.

    That is much more convenient as there are railway connections through Russia and Central Asia, easier than the US across the Atlantic.

    That will be a cruel war with heavy casualty, which China with a huge population can afford, but can the US and its European allies afford?

    The article’s assumption of US fighting in two separate theaters with the help of its European allies is but the writer’s wishful thinking based on Chinese or Russian leaders’ lack of vision.

    Comment by Chan Kai Yee on National Interest’s article that was reblogged in his blog on August 30.



    Trying to find a winning scenario against Russia alone in the Baltic's without China...

    As Pentagon dusts off war plans for Russia, planners can’t find one scenario in which the U.S. wins


    Written By: usafeaturesmedia August 9, 2016
    SHARE (1443)
    SHARE (21)

    (NationalSecurity.news) A resurgent and aggressive Russia has created new concerns among Pentagon officials, leading them to dust off Cold War-era plans for dealing with Moscow’s improved forces. But when war-gaming long-forgotten scenarios under today’s conditions, Defense Department planners have made a shocking discovery: The U.S. military routinely comes up on the losing end of any conflict with Russian troops, Foreign Policy (FP) reported Monday.

    To be sure, the Pentagon is always generating contingency plans for every possible scenario – from armed confrontation with Iran and North Korea to stopping zombie attacks (not a joke). As FP notes, those plans are then ranked and honed depending on priority and probability.

    Since the end of the Cold War in 1991, conflict with Russia and former Soviet satellite states dropped off the radar and, for the past two decades essentially sat on a shelf gathering dust.

    Now, however, as Russia becomes more active in Eastern Europe and more aggressive in Ukraine and Syria, Pentagon planners have begun revisiting old Cold War scenarios, according to several officials in the State and Defense departments, FP reported. Specifically, those plans are being updated “to reflect a new, post-Crimea-annexation geopolitical reality in which Russia is no longer a potential partner, but a potential threat,” the magazine reported online.

    “Given the security environment, given the actions of Russia, it has become apparent that we need to make sure to update the plans that we have in response to any potential aggression against any NATO allies,” one senior defense official familiar with the updated plans said.

    “Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine made the US dust off its contingency plans,” added Michèle Flournoy, a former undersecretary of defense for policy and co-founder of the Center for a New American Security. “They were pretty out of date.”

    Like NationalSecurity.news on Facebook! Click here!

    According to the senior defense official, the new plans are taking two tracks: One has homed in on what the U.S. could do as part of NATO, if Russia were to launch an offensive against an alliance member; the other looks at what actions the U.S. could take outside the NATO umbrella. But both plans, however, focus on Russian incursions into the Baltic States, as this is the most likely scenario.

    In addition, planners are not focusing solely on traditional warfare but on so-called “hybrid” tactics Moscow used to infiltrate and take Crimea – seemingly unaffiliated operatives and forces, manufactured protests and, of course, elements of cyberwarfare.

    “They are trying to figure out in what circumstances [the U.S. Defense Department] would respond to a cyberattack,” Julie Smith, who until recently served as the vice president’s deputy national security advisor, told FP. “There’s a lively debate on that going on right now.”

    Experts say that is a major departure from Cold War-era planning.

    After the fall of the Soviet Union, the West slowly began to integrate Russia into NATO, the alliance initially formed to counter the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact. Indeed, NATO even began absorbing some of the former Warsaw Pact nations. At the same time, the alliance stepped up cooperation and joint training with Moscow. In 1994, Russia signed on to NATO’s “Partnership for Peace” program, and in 1997 Russia signed an agreement of mutual cooperation with the alliance declaring that the two were no longer adversaries. And while Russia at times voiced displeasure with an expanding NATO, from the West – and from Washington, in particular – everything appeared fairly normal. Moscow even cooperated in allowing U.S. and NATO war materiel bound for Afghanistan to pass through a NATO transit point in Ulyanovsk, Russia.

    But following Russia’s war with neighboring Georgia in 2008, things began to change. While NATO slightly altered its plans as related to Russia, the Pentagon did not. In the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, the Pentagon’s office in charge of force planning – which recommends long-term resource allocation – proposed to then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to include contingencies to counter an aggressive Russia, but he refused, FP reported.

    “Everyone’s judgment at the time was that Russia is pursuing objectives aligned with ours,” noted David Ochmanek, who, as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, ran that office at the time. “Russia’s future looked to be increasingly integrated with the West.”

    And Smith, who assisted in devising European and NATO policy at the Pentagon at the time, told FP, “If you asked the military five years ago, ‘Give us a flavor of what you’re thinking about,’ they would’ve said, ‘Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism — and China.’”

    Many believed Russia’s response to Georgia was provoked by the latter and more of a one-time thing. But the Crimea and Ukraine – which caught planners off-guard – as well as direct Russian military involvement in Syria, has changed the Pentagon’s thinking.

    In June 2014, just one month before leaving his force-planning position at the Pentagon, Air Force officials sought out Ochmanek for insight on the Baltic region and other Russian neighborhoods ahead of President Obama’s visit to Tallinn, Estonia. In addition, the Army sought out an Ochmanek colleague at the Rand Corporation, where Ochmanek also frequented, to run a “table top” war game between a Red (Russia) team and a blue (NATO) team. As FP reports, the scenario was similar to the one that played out in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine: Increased Russian political pressure on Estonia and Latvia (each NATO country sharing borders with Russia and home to sizeable Russian-speaking minorities) followed by the introduction of provocateurs, seizures of government buildings and demonstrations. The question: Would NATO be able to defend those nations?

    As FP reported:

    The results were dispiriting. Given the recent reductions in the defense budgets of NATO member countries and American pullback from the region, Ochmanek says the blue team was outnumbered 2-to-1 in terms of manpower, even if all the US and NATO troops stationed in Europe were dispatched to the Baltics — including the 82nd Airborne , [sic] which is supposed to be ready to go on 24 hours’ notice and is based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

    “We just don’t have those forces in Europe,” Ochmanek said. In addition, he said, the Russians are equipped with what some believe are the world’s best surface-to-air missiles and they don’t hesitate to use heavy artillery.

    After eight hours of gaming out various scenarios, “The conclusion was that we are unable to defend the Baltics,” Ochmanek concluded.

    What if NATO and the U.S. began making improvements in force structure now would the results be much different?
    “We can defend the capitals, we can present Russia with problems, and we can take away the prospect of a coup de main,” Ochmanek told FP. “But the dynamic remains the same.”

    With sequestration-related force cuts that will trim Army troops by 40,000, as well as reductions across the board at the Pentagon, the logistics become even more daunting. Spinning up U.S. battalions and getting them to the war zone would take 30–60 days, and the Russians “can do a lot of damage in that time,” Ochmanek said.

    U.S. planners believe that American forces and NATO would eventually take back any territory overrun by Russian forces, but the cost would be high – and the task anything but easy.



    Outnumbered, Outranged, and Outgunned: How Russia Defeats NATO

    David A. Shlapak and Michael W. Johnson
    April 21, 2016



    When asked two weeks ago in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee whether the Army was “outranged” by any adversary, U.S. Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milleysaid: “Yes … the ones in Europe, really Russia. We don’t like it, we don’t want it, but yes, technically [we are] outranged, outgunned on the ground.”

    Given Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, this is sobering testimony. But is it accurate? Unfortunately, yes: Nearly two years of extensive wargaming and analysis shows that if Russia were to conduct a short-warning attack against the Baltic States, Moscow’s forces could roll to the outskirts of the Estonian capital of Tallinn and the Latvian capital of Riga in 36 to 60 hours. In such a scenario, the United States and its allies would not only be outranged and outgunned, but also outnumbered.

    Outnumbered?

    While the Russian army is a fraction of the size of its Soviet predecessor and is maintained at a level of imperfect readiness, we found that it could — in 10 days or so — generate a force of as many as 27 fully ready battalions (30–50,000 soliders in their maneuver formations, depending on precisely how they were organized) for an attack on the Baltics while maintaining its ongoing coercive campaign against Ukraine.

    All these Russian units would be equipped with armored vehicles — tanks, infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), and so forth.

    NATO, meanwhile, would be able to respond largely with only light, unarmored, or lightly armored forces. These would consist of the forces of the Baltic republics themselves and those that the United States and its partners could rush to the scene in the few days of warning that would likely be available.

    Counting the “Very High Readiness Joint Task Force” (VJTF), NATO could optimistically deploy elements from three airborne infantry brigades, one Stryker brigade, and one U.S. armor brigade. Russia would achieve initial advantages in tanks (7:1), infantry fighting vehicles (5:1), attack helicopters (5:1), cannon artillery (4:1), long-range rocket artillery (16:1), short-range air defense (24:1), and long-range air defense (17:1).




    Outranged?

    But the problem is not just numbers.

    The Russians field cannon and rocket artillery with significantly longer ranges than their U.S. counterparts. Existing Army tube artillery can generally fire at targets 14 to 24 kilometers (9 to 15 miles) away. Unfortunately, the most common Russian self-propelled howitzer NATO forces would encounter in the Baltics has a range of 29 kilometers (or 19 miles). On the battlefield, these differences matter.

    Moreover, at the moment, the United States has no Multiple-Launch Rocket System units deployed in Europe, but even if it were, and the range of its primary rocket is only 40–70 kilometers (25–44 miles) depending on payload. Meanwhile, Russian forces are richly equipped with two rocket artillery systems with ranges up to 90 kilometers (56 miles).

    Outgunned?

    Here the evidence is somewhat less clear, but the situation is certainly far less favorable to the United States than it is accustomed to. While Russia’s tanks and IFVs in some cases share the same designations as those that U.S. forces encountered in Iraq in 1991 and 2003, those weapons have little in common besides the name. They have much more advanced armor, weapons, and sensors, and in some areas — such as active protection systems to defend against anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) — are superior to their Western counterparts.

    If a fight broke out today in the Baltics, Russian attack helicopters, IFVs, and even some tanks could employ ATGMs with an effective range that could penetrate the armor of most if not all NATO combat vehicles, including the U.S. M1 tank. The M1s might maintain a slight advantage in the close-in fight, if they survived to get there. But given the current U.S. posture, there would at best be only a few dozen on the field, compared to about 450 Russian. The Baltic states themselves have no heavy armor, and our analysis indicates that no other European heavy forces could make it to the frontlines in time to influence the outcome of a short-warning Russian assault.

    Beyond the disadvantages of being outnumbered, outranged, and outgunned, a slew of other issues compounds the problem. First, NATO allies and the U.S. military would be of limited immediate help offsetting these disadvantages.

    European allies followed the American lead by cutting armor and optimizing their remaining forces for “out-of-area” missions like Afghanistan. Thus, Great Britain is continuing with plans to withdraw its last troops from Germany, while Germany has reduced its army from a Cold War level of 10 heavy divisions to the equivalent of two.

    But it’s not just the numbers here that matter. The United States and its partners have also steadily reduced the infrastructure necessary to support any kind of substantial deterrent or defensive effort in Europe. Today, there are no U.S. division or corps headquarters forward-based on the continent, nor any Army aviation, engineer, and associated logistics brigades. Our analysis — which assumed brigades could be received, moved to the front, and then commanded, controlled, and supported once there — may have ignored significant shortfalls in all these dimensions. Deploying brigades is not enough. Without a plan, without adequate logistics, without robust command and control, a better-prepared adversary would still overwhelm NATO.

    Second, airpower has long been the U.S. trump card, and the Army relies on it to deliver fire support and protect its units from enemy air attack. This reliance has reduced the amount of artillery it deploys with its maneuver forces and, for all intents and purposes, has stripped them of organic air defenses.




    While these choices were entirely sound in facing the Taliban and Iraq’s air force and integrated air defenses, Russia is an entirely different story. Russia fields perhaps the most formidable array of surface-to-air missile (SAM) defenses in the world. Operating from locations within Russian territory, these SAMs far outrange existing defense-suppression weapons and present a credible threat to U.S. and allied airpower that would be costly and time-consuming to counter. Unlike recent American wars, getting air support will not be as easy as making a call and waiting. Especially in the crucial early days of any conflict, allied ground forces may find air support available only in narrow windows of time and space.

    And third, the Russians possess a credible air force of their own. Our analysis shows that Moscow could commit hundreds of fighter, attack, and bomber aircraft to an assault on the Baltic states. While such forces are ultimately qualitatively and quantitatively inferior to the alliance’s airpower, when teamed with Russia’s surface-to-air defenses, such forces could present a threat to U.S. and allied ground forces moving to reinforce or counterattack. Without ground-based air defenses of their own, and with limited overhead cover from NATO air forces, U.S. Army formations could suffer serious attrition from enemy air attack for the first time since World War II.

    On top of all these issues, geography is a harsh mistress in this scenario. It’s about 130 miles from the Russian border to Riga, a distance that modern armored forces can traverse in a matter of hours. Even against fierce opposition from airpower, our analysis shows that there is simply not enough time to inflict sufficient damage to halt a Russian attack, absent sufficient NATO ground forces to slow their movement and force invaders to operate in ways that make them more vulnerable to air attack. This is intrinsically a joint fight, not one that can be won on the ground or from the skies alone.

    Add in the fact that the Bush administration decided — and the Obama administration affirmed — that, beginning in 2019, U.S. forces will no longer use cluster weapons that leave more than one percent of their ordnance unexploded on the ground. While admirable on humanitarian grounds, this decision — for which there is no parallel on the Russian side — will significantly reduce the effectiveness of U.S. artillery and air fire against Russian artillery, air defense, and mechanized targets. Given the weakness of NATO’s overall posture, this is no trivial concession.

    Today NATO is indeed outnumbered, outranged, and outgunned by Russia in Europe and beset by a number of compounding factors that make the situation worse. Having said that, it is possible to begin restoring a more robust deterrent posture and to do so at a price tag that appears affordable in the context of an alliance with an aggregate GDP of $35 trillion. The enlarged European Reassurance Initiative announced by the administration is a step in the right direction, though not a complete solution. Also, NATO’s European members must begin making the necessary investments to fulfill their commitments to the alliance’s collective defense; this is not just America’s problem.

    It seems unlikely that Vladimir Putin intends to turn his guns on NATO any time soon. However, the consequences should he decide to do so are severe. Probably the best outcome — if the phrase has any meaning in this context — would be something like a new Cold War, with all the implications that bears. A war with Russia would be fraught with escalatory potential from the moment the first shot was fired; and generations born outside the shadow of nuclear Armageddon would suddenly be reintroduced to fears thought long dead and buried.

    A situation 20 years in the making will not be solved overnight, nor will solving it be politically simple or non-controversial for an alliance consisting of 29 members with different priorities and perceptions. Nonetheless, the potential consequences of failing to do so are so dire that prudent investments — in improved posture and thoughtful, targeted modernization of the joint force — to stave them off are warranted to assure allies living next to a belligerent Russia and to provide an insurance policy against the risks of a potential catastrophe.

    David A. Shlapak is a senior international research analyst and Michael W. Johnson is a senior defense research analyst at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation.

    Photo credit: Aleksey Kitaev




    Frustrated and thinking about going nuclear against Russia?

    Russia’s Nuclear Weapons Superior Than U.S.


    By Athena Yenko
    Published on

    Russian president Vladimir Putin announced on Tuesday that Russia’s nuclear force will receive 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles. These new missiles will be capable of overcoming any most technically advanced anti-missile defense systems, the Russian president said.

    The announcement from Mr Putin should serve as a stark warning that Russia has never stopped advancing its nuclear capabilities after the Cold War. The country may have reached a point at present where it possesses nuclear weapons far more advanced than U.S.

    Russia is constructing its amphibious assault ship that is capable of carrying 500 troopers and 40-60 military units. It has recently paraded a first-of-its-kind six-zone tank. It has developed the Lada submarine that could remain submerged for up to 25 days. In 2013, the country began developing supersonic precision weapons and as far back as 2011 it is developing missiles which the West dubbed as “Satan.”

    The U.S. on the other hand stopped its innovations of nuclear warheads in the decades after winning the Cold War.

    Late in 2014, then defense secretary Chuck Hagel announced a proposal of $1.5 to $15 billion a year worth of maintenance to the government’s nuclear arsenals. Before his resignation, he admitted that the U.S. Air Force and Navy had been busy with other security issues that nuclear infrastructures and maintenance have deteriorated through the years.

    Russia’s new missile unbeatable even to the most advanced of anti-missile defense systems


    “This year we will supply more than 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles to our nuclear force. They will be capable of overcoming any most technically advanced anti-missile defense systems,” Mr Putin said in his opening address during the ARMY-2015 International Military-Technical Forum.
    His announcement did not stop there.

    “In April, we launched full-scale work on the radar station in Armavir. In the next few months, we are to test a new radar unit for over-the-horizon airborne target detection. It will eventually control the western strategic area. We will start building a similar unit this year for the eastern area,” Mr Putin said.

    He said Russian troops will be equipped with new armored vehicles designed after the Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang and Koalitsiya-SV self-propelled units.

    “Combat capabilities of these machines are unrivaled,” he said.

    Mr Putin said that the combat capabilities of Russia’s Air Forces and Navy will be constantly upgraded.
    “This year a new strategic submarine cruiser Vladimir Monomakh will go on combat duty. We will increase our surface fleet and the aviation component,” he said.

    New Amphibious assault ship



    Russia has recently launch a project to develop a new amphibious assault ship with a displacement of 14,000 tons, capable of carrying up to eight Ka-52K and Ka-27 helicopters. It will be armed Pantsir-M anti-aircraft complex. It will be 25 meters wide and 165 meters long. Its construction is set to begin in 2016, a source told political newspaper Pravda on condition of anonymity.

    T-14 Armata, the newest six zone tank



    On May 9, Russia paraded a new six-zone tank, T-14. The tank, a first-of-its-kind, can avoid collision with its radar that can detect enemies as far as 100 km. It can destroy approaching threats in automatic mode. It can also avoid detection, avoid target acquisition and avoid hits from the enemy. In the instance that the tank is shelled, its armor can avoid penetration, hence avoiding destruction that can kill the crew inside.

    Lada submarine


    The new Russian submarine can remain submerged in water for 25 days. The only submarines that come close to this capability are submarines from Germany that can only last underwater for 20 days.

    Russia has more tactical weapons than NATO and U.S.


    In 2014, Pravda ran a report detailing the huge gap among tactical nuclear weapons of Russia, U.S. and NATO. The report said NATO countries have only 260 tactical weapons, the U.S. has 200 atomic bombs located in air based in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey. However, Russia has 5,000 pieces of tactical nuclear weapons consisting of Iskander warheads, torpedoes and nuclear vehicles.
    Russia’s missile development aimed at U.S.


    As early as 2011, Russia had been developing intercontinental ballistic missiles. The country has always been vocal that its developments are aimed at deterring all possible attack coming from the U.S.

    “The decision about the creation of the new silo-based missile system with a liquid-fuel heavy missile has been made. The complex will have increased possibilities in overcoming the prospective missile defense system of the United States,” Russia’s commander of missile troop, Sergei Karakaev, was quoted as saying at the time.

    “Russia does not stand against the US missile defense system. Russia stands against the creation of the missile defense system, which would be directly aimed against Russia to potentially reduce the possibilities of the Russian nuclear containment forces,” Karakaev said.

    In 2013, Russia’s defense minister said that Russia will increase its supersonic precision weapons five-fold by 2020. Defense deputy Yuri Borisov said the U.S. has the same plan but will begin development by 2018-2025.

    U.S. neglected nuclear programs


    While Russia has been flaunting its nuclear innovations, the U.S. on the other hand admitted that it has neglected its nuclear program for decades. In November of 2014, then defense secretary Hagel announced a proposal of $1.5 to 15 billion a year to maintain the government’s nuclear arsenals.

    Hagel asked the commitment of Pentagon officials to improve the status of the government’s nuclear programs by modernizing nuclear warheads, long-range bombers and ballistic missile submarines, The Washington Post reported at the time.

    Members of the congress agreed to the budget proposal. The government’s nuclear programs suffered because of “insufficient resources, indifferent leadership, and poor morale,” said Rep Howard McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.


    World War III: Why Russia will bury the West

    24008 Views December 05, 2015 73 Comments
    by Rakesh Krishnan Simha
    source: The Russia India report

    In June 2014, the Pentagon conducted a “table top” exercise – a sort of war game between Russia and NATO. The scenario was Russian pressure on NATO member Estonia and Latvia. Would NATO be able to defend those countries?

    “The results were dispiriting,” Julia Ioffe writes in Foreign Policy. Even if all US and NATO troops stationed in Europe were dispatched to the Baltics – including the 82nd Airborne, which is supposed to be ready to go on 24 hours’ notice – the US would lose.

    “We just don’t have those forces in Europe,” explains a senior US general. “Then there’s the fact that the Russians have the world’s best surface-to-air missiles and are not afraid to use heavy artillery.”

    The Russian ‘victory’ was not a one-off. The Americans conducted the exercise as many as 16 times, under various scenarios, all favourable to NATO, always with the same conclusion. The Russians were simply invincible.

    In this backdrop, Turkey’s rash act of shooting down a Russian Air Force jet portends grave tidings for NATO. Because Turkey is a NATO member, if the Russian Air Force pounds the living daylight out of the Turks, at least in theory all the other members of the US-led military bloc are treaty-bound to come to its defence.

    Although the chances that the Americans will risk New York for Istanbul are smaller than small – which leaves a very nervous Turkey on its own – one can never rule out the possibility of a NATO hothead wanting to attack Russia.

    A nuclear exchange will undoubtedly have catastrophic consequences for both sides – and perhaps the entire planet – but there are certain factors that could skew the fighting field in Russia’s favour.

    Megaton capability

    According to data exchanged on October 1, 2014 by Moscow and Washington, Russia has 1,643 deployed strategic warheads, compared with 1,642 for the US. Marginal difference in numbers but Russian land-based strategic forces have an explosive yield that is an order of magnitude greater than anything in the US armoury.

    Moscow’s primary deterrent weapon is the mighty SS-18, a single one of which can destroy an area the size of New York – the state, not just the city. To get an idea of the destructive power of the SS-18, just look at the nuclear weapon the US used to destroy the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The Hiroshima bomb was a primitive 15 kiloton warhead and yet it wiped out a city of 70,000 in a few seconds. The SS-18 – code named Satan by NATO – carries 10 warheads, each having a yield of 750 to 1000 kiloton). Some of these missiles carry a single 20,000 kiloton warhead – that’s 1333 times Hiroshima.

    At the same time, 80 per cent of the American population resides on the eastern and western seaboards, so a few well-aimed nuclear missiles can end all human life in these densely populated coastal strips. Russia has a population only half of the US but it’s dispersed widely across the country’s massive landmass so that pockets of human inhabitation can survive both a first as well as a second strike.

    Russia has another trump card up its sleeve – its supersonic bomber fleet of Tupolev Tu-160s. These Mach 2 plus aircraft can take off from well-defended airbases located deep in the heart of Russia, fly over the North Pole, launch nuclear-tipped cruise missiles from safe standoff distances over the Atlantic, and return home to watch the destruction on CNN.

    That’s assuming CNN will be around. For, the Russian strategic bomber fleet can singlehandedly wipe out every major city in the US.

    It is because the Americans know the capability of Russia’s nuclear forces that they have tried hard to eliminate the doomsday weapons like the SS-18 through arms limitation talks.

    Tactical warheads

    Before the use of strategic weapons, Russia could cripple forward NATO bases with tactical – or battlefield – nukes.

    Russian military doctrine emphasises the use of small-yield nuclear weapons as a war fighting tool early on in a conflict in order to stun and confuse NATO forces, impacting their ability to think and act coherently.

    After tactical nuclear artillery decimates forward deployed NATO military troops, Russia could deliver small-yield warheads via intermediate range missiles that could devastate the next line of military bases, while limiting civilian casualties. At this point the US would be faced with the option of retaliating with strategic weapons and face a devastating response from Moscow. A good guess is the option won’t be used.

    For, no American president would risk a single US city for a dozen European ones. John F. Kennedy didn’t risk it in 1962 for the same reason – the loss of even one city was too many.

    State of US strategic forces

    How reliable is the US Strategic Nuclear Command? If you are an American, you won’t feel so reassured after reading that Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton both “reportedly lost the launch code cards that presidents are expected to have on them at all times – Clinton for months, according to a former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Carter allegedly sent his out with a suit to the cleaners”.

    In any conflict – more so in a high stakes nuclear standoff – morale, training and discipline are key factors. Russian officers who have the job of deciding when and where to aim their nuclear missiles include PhD holders who are required to think on their feet. On the other hand, American personnel who have the same role are beset with alcoholism, depression and cheating.

    Nothing can sugar coat the crisis plaguing the US strategic forces. In October 2013, Major General Michael Carey, responsible for the command of 450 nuclear missiles, was fired after drunken behaviour on a visit to Russia. Days earlier, another military officer, Vice Admiral Tim Giardina, with high-level responsibility for the country’s nuclear arsenal, was relieved of his duties after he was caught using counterfeit gambling chips at an Iowa casino.

    Think that’s frightening? Check this out. A US Air Force general who supported the command mission to provide nuclear forces for the US Strategic Command was an alcoholic. General David C. Uhrich kept a vodka bottle in his desk and repeatedly drank on duty, so much so that another officer told investigators that “if he did not have his alcohol, the wheels would come off”.

    The rot has trickled down to US missileers who have a culture of cheating on competency tests, endangering the readiness off American ICBMs. Again, in February 2014, the US Navy revealed it was looking into allegations that enlisted sailors cheated on tests involving the nuclear reactors that power its submarines and aircraft carriers.
    The US strategic forces are also suffering from systemic neglect, with its ICBM bases in North Dakota and Montana reporting “leaking roofs”. The missileers, who work in blast-proof bunkers located 60 feet underground, are forced to defecate in buckets and urinate in jugs, and bring it all back up at the end of 24 hours. How ready these personnel will be when they have to react to a Russian missile strike is questionable.

    On the other hand, Russian Strategic Forces are treated as the very elites in the military. The quality of Russian personnel can be deduced from the actions of Russian strategic forces officer Lt Colonel Stanislav Petrov. On September 26, 1983, a Russian early-warning satellite indicated five US nuclear missile launches. Tensions were high between Washington and Moscow after the downing of a South Korean airliner weeks earlier, and Petrov had only minutes to respond. With little additional information to go on, he deemed the readings a false alarm, reasoning that “when people start a war, they don’t start it with only five missiles”.

    This is precisely why highly qualified personnel matter. When you’re placed squarely in the cross hairs of the enemy’s nuclear missiles and you’re holed up in a bunker 60 feet below the earth’s surface, then nervousness, insomnia and depression are part of your daily life. Unable to cope, less educated personnel will abuse alcohol and drugs and even exhibit criminal behaviour. On the other hand, educated and motivated officers will keep their cool even in the event of a thermonuclear showdown.

    For, a nuclear war may not necessarily involve a quick exchange of ballistic missiles. According to War Scare: Russia and America on the Nuclear Brink, by Peter Vincent Pry, Director of the US Nuclear Strategy Forum, the Russian Strategic Forces are trained to “launch pre-emptive or retaliatory nuclear strikes, survive a hammer blow from a massive enemy nuclear attack, launch follow-on nuclear strikes, and supervise military operations in a protracted nuclear war, expected to last weeks or months”.

    In such a drawn out, harrowing scenario, Russia’s nuclear warfare specialists clearly have the edge.

    Reflexive Control: Ultimate Weapon

    Disinformation, camouflage and stratagem are some of the ways one can influence the outcome of a war. The Russians have taken these ancient arts to another level through the use of the theory of Reflexive Control (RC).

    Developed by Russian military strategists in the 1960s, RC aims to convey information to an opponent that would influence them to voluntarily make a decision desired by the initiator of the action. It can be used against either human or computer-based decision-making processors. Russia employs it not only at the strategic and tactical levels in war but also in the geopolitical sphere.

    Russian Army Major General M.D. Ionov was among the early proponents of RC, having pursued it since the 1970s. In an article in 1995, he noted that the objective of reflexive control is to force an enemy into making decisions that lead to his defeat by influencing or controlling his decision-making process.

    Ionov considers this a form of high art founded of necessity on an intimate knowledge of human thinking and psychology, military history, the roots of the particular conflict, and the capabilities of competing combat assets.

    Timothy L. Thomas writes in the Journal of Slavic Studies: “In a war in which reflexive control is being employed, the side with the highest degree of reflex (the side best able to imitate the other side’s thoughts or predict its behaviour) will have the best chances of winning. The degree of reflex depends on many factors, the most important of which are analytical capability, general erudition and experience, and the scope of knowledge about the enemy.”

    If successfully achieved, reflexive control over the enemy makes it possible to influence their combat plans, their view of the situation, and how they fight. RC methods are varied and include camouflage (at all levels), disinformation, encouragement, blackmail by force, and the compromising of various officials and officers.

    According to Robert C. Rasmussen of the Center for International Maritime Security, “It is exactly this type of application of Reflexive Control that a young Vladimir Putin would have learned in his early development at the 401st KGB School and in his career as a KGB/FSB officer.”

    Because every battle is first fought in the head before a bullet is fired on the ground, Russia’s long experience with RC would be a key factor in its existential struggle with the US.




    More indication both Russia and China are planning to join forces on the battlefield to ensure victory.


    Russia, China Target US Allies In ‘War Games’

    Written by: Tara Dodrill


    Russia and China are holding “large scale” war games – and the Pentagon has taken notice.

    China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) announced that war games would take place the final week of September, with military troops slated to undergo training to prepare them for “real war” conditions. The China war games will involve the use of ships, aircraft, trains and ground vehicles and involve both “civilian assets” and soldiers. Vehicles and aircraft utilized in the military exercise will also include civilian modes of transportation.

    Meanwhile, in Russia, military training activities already were held, reportedly involving thousands of soldiers and taking place in both Asia and Europe.

    NATO troops are scheduled to engage in equally massive war games beginning in November. United States officials say that the NATO military drills will focus on countering a westward Russian military encroachment.

    The Russian’s Zapad-13 war games in Belarus reportedly included simulated attacks on states in the West. An American military said “the Russians are moving forces closer to Europe, and that is troubling,” according to the Washington Free Beacon.

    Approximately 13,000 Belarusian and Russian troops participated in more than 60 helicopter and aircraft drills. The Russian war games also included “rapid reaction” drills as a part of the military training exercises. The military drills were designed to help troops improve their precision when conducting missile and air strikes.

    In June, Russian Air Force Chief Lt. General Vladimir Bondarev announced that an air base in Belarus would be opened near the border of Lithuania and Poland. The Russian air base would be suitable for Su-27 warplanes. The base will be the first opened in Europe by Russia since the Soviet Union fell apart. Russian also has bases in Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Tajikistan.

    Alexander Lukashenko, the Belarus President, has reportedly moved toward the ways of the former Soviet Union, and symbols associated with a Soviet Belarus are reappearing in the country. Russia has also installed a ballistic missile warning radar and a naval communications facility in Belarus. Such a facility could be used to communicate with submarines. Belarus was reportedly given Tor-M3 surface-to-air missiles and advanced S-300 missile defenses by Russia.

    “The theme of the exercise is the training and the engagement of troops in order to ensure the military security of the Union State [of Belarus and Russia],” said Belarusian Deputy Defense Minister Major General Pyotr Tsikhanowski.“New weapons and military equipment will be tested during the exercises. At the same time, the conflicting states are hypothetically located within the actual borders of Belarus and the three western and northwestern regions of Russia.”

    Polish officials disputed a press report that the Russia and China war games would simulate a nuclear strike on the country’s capital. A Polish government official identified as only a “high-ranking officer” called the supposed targeting of the capital “nothing but imagination” by local journalists.

    Pentagon officials reportedly believe the war games are part of an effort by Russia to showcase their military might and enhance its standing in former Soviet Union nations. European NATO nations are not thrilled with the Russian war games and Belarus military enhancements. Although Russia has deemed the exercises and equipment part of “anti-terrorism exercises,” the Lithuanians remain unconvinced there is not something more sinister involved.

    “If you look at the Baltic Sea region, the strategic balance has been changing quite drastically in the last decade, and not in our favor,” said Latvian Defense Minister Artis Pabriks. “We are concerned because we see such large-scale exercises in context.”

    The Cold War with Russian supposedly ended a long time ago. Do you feel that Russia and China are once again emerging as threats against America?


    Pentagon seems aware in 2015 current triad forces may be lacking, looking higher for strategies.

    H.R. 4909, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

    Floor Situation

    On Tuesday, May 17, 2015, the House will begin consideration of H.R. 4909, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017, under a structured rule.

    The bill was introduced on April 12, 2016 by Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), and was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, which ordered the bill reported, as amended, on April 28, 2016 by a vote 60 to 2.

    Due by 1-15-17.

    https://policy.house.gov/legislative...scal-year-2017

    ^^^About a month after the House considers HR 4909 in May 2015...vvv




    Pentagon Preps For Nuclear Space War With Eyes On China, Russia

    By Athena Yenko
    Published on



    Pentagon has increased its funding to more than $5 billion in order to develop the nation’s space war capabilities. The department is working with the intelligence community and private industry in developing command centers that will fend off attack in orbit from Russia and China.

    Both Russia and China are emerging as great powers, according to Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work. And by great powers he means they now possess enough military assets to put up a serious fight in an all-out conventional war against the most powerful state in the world, Work said at the GeoInt Symposium held on Tuesday.

    Russia and China now possess nuclear deterrent that can survive a nuclear strike, he said.

    End of U.S.’s dominance in space


    Work said the end to an era where the nation was the world’s only superpower in space technology has ended.
    “Russia represents a clear and present danger,” Work highlighted. He said that for 25 years U.S. and the European Union have reached out to Russia but to no avail. At present, Russia is undermining NATO, dominating the Arctic and threatening many of U.S.’s allies, Work said.

    China, on the other hand, will present “a significant and varied challenge over the next 25 years.”

    “This doesn’t mean to suggest in any way, shape, or form that China and the United States are destined to become adversaries. There will be areas where the two sides will agree and cooperate and other areas where they disagree and won’t,” Work said.

    Nuclear deterrence

    The best response to any threat is a strong conventional and nuclear deterrent capabilities, Work said.

    “First, we have to overmatch the technical capabilities of any potential adversary. Second, we have to maintain the ability to project power across transoceanic distances and defeat any adversary’s attempt to project power across inter- or intra-theater distances. Third, we have to routinely demonstrate both capabilities.”

    Space is now a contested operational domain


    Pentagon will build an operations center in six months, Work announced. This center will receive data from satellites belonging to all government agencies he said. Furthermore, Air Force secretary Deborah James would soon be designated as the principal space advisor to Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.

    Work declared that the space that was once just a “virtual sanctuary” must now “be considered a contested operational domain in ways that we haven’t had to think about in the past.”




    Pentagon Preps Space War Capabilities Against Russia & China

    By Jereco Paloma

    Published on
    For superpower nations, there are a lot of ways to demonstrate its supremacy in military might, one of which is up in the space. Now, the Pentagon is reportedly eyeing to beef up its space war capabilities as China and Russia are busy honing its own.

    As previously reported by Morning News USA, Pentagon is preparing for a World War 3 that can happen in space.

    “I also want to mention space because at times in the past, space was seen as a sanctuary, new and emerging threats make clear that that’s not the case anymore and we must be prepared for the possibility of a conflict that extends in space,” Defense secretary Ash Carter told press in February this year.

    At the time, Pentagon was already vocal about eyeing both Russia and China as the top strongest threat against America.

    Now, a related report has surfaced, supporting the said possibility.

    Over the past years, the United States has been embroiled in military arms flex between China and Russia. But lately, sins are indicating that the Pentagon should start looking up in the air as China has been doing launches in the past years, that could potentially obliterate the America’s “most valuable real estate in space,” the Washington Post reported.

    The report was referring to highly sensitive satellite installed and parked by the US government in space, which was recently been endangered when a Chinese rocket approach at a dangerously close distance.

    It was reported that the rocket launched by China some three years ago, had a close distance to US satellites about 22,000 miles. In the space, such distance is considered a dangerously close one, which experts consider as a wake-up call for the US government to beef up its space war security program.

    Russia also raised the alarm for a possible space war when one of its satellites flew closely to two Intelsat communications satellites in 2014. The year after, Pentagon scrambled to have the U.S. Air Force Space Command in Colorado to simulate a futuristic World War set in 2025.

    Throughout the years that followed, Pentagon ramp up all developments of its space war capabilities. At present, the Air Force secretary has his own “principal space adviser;” war games conducted involved simulation of battles in space; most recently, Pentagon begun developing “Space Fence,” according to the report from the Washington Post.

    Read: World War 3 Could Happen In Space


    Satellites in orbit play a crucial role, not only for sending information about happenings in the space, but it also served highly-sensitive military functions such as surveillance and in guiding missiles and bombs to ensure high-level precision.
    According to a related report from Newsweek, a war in space, that could possibly erupt over the disputed South China Sea or over Eastern Europe, could also obliterate civilian and commercial satellites futile. This means that life back on Earth will also be directly affected – from cellphone satellites, banks, including GPS units.

    “War in space would very quickly involve the civilian world,” Peter Singer, a prominent military strategist and author, told Newsweek.

    He added that China, and Russia, are all in a race to dominate not only the world, but even the outer space.

    “The U.S., China, Russia are all working on not just using space, but also taking it away from the other side.”



    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  18. #998
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,663
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 73 Times in 68 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....

    Western countries are not prepared for nuclear war, warns fallout expert

    Exclusive: 'People understand better that this will come as a surprise. If you are not prepared in advance, you won't have a good response'



    Western countries are ill-prepared for the aftermath of a nuclear war or catastrophic meltdown, an expert specialising in the impacts of fallout has warned.

    It comes amid heightened tensions between the US and North Korea over the latter’s dogged pursuit of its nuclear and missile programmes, in defiance of UN sanctions and international pressure. Both Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have indicated support for expanding their nuclear arsenals.

    With the recent ramping up of rhetoric between world powers, governments owe it to their citizens to be prepared for potential nuclear incidents, Dr Arik Eisenkraft, director of homeland defence projects at Pluristem Therapeutics, told The Independent.


    • Read more


    Risk of 'catastrophic' nuclear accident as relations worsen, UN warns

    The heightened tensions since Mr Trump took office have “really highlighted the reality, how things are fragile, how things may change in a few days”, he said.

    “People understand better that this will come as a surprise. If you are not prepared in advance, you won't have a good response. Once everyone is aware of the potential of this problem, you are already on the way to having a good solution.”

    The world is still learning lessons from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, he said. “Chernobyl opened our eyes. For the first time, people all over the world understood that a single incident might influence their own countries even if they are far away and regardless if they themselves use nuclear energy.”

    The catastrophic accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Pripyat, Ukraine, killed at least 31 people, the majority from acute radiation syndrome, with potential long-term cancers still being investigated. "Everyone now understands the need to be prepared is shared by everyone," he said.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  19. The Following User Says Thank You to vector7 For This Useful Post:

    American Patriot (May 15th, 2017)

  20. #999
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    Next U.S. War Will Be Long, Hard and Take the Entire Country to Win, Army Chief Says

    July 28, 2017

    The Army’s leading officer dispelled Thursday some of the more persistent myths about the potential major conflicts of the future, emphasizing that war was never likely to be a simple endeavor.

    Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley told reporters at the National Press Club in Washington that despite technological and strategic developments, tomorrow’s wars may look a lot like today’s in the sense that they will probably be violent, prolonged battles that require extensive resources both to fight and to resolve. As the U.S. prepares to enter its 16th consecutive year battling Islamist militant groups abroad and contemplates new engagements with state actors such as Iran and North Korea, Milley reminded his audience that what seems like a quick operation could very soon devolve into a long-term confrontation.

    “There are wars that have been short in the past, but they’re pretty rare,” Milley said, according to Army Times. “Most of the time, wars take longer than people think they will at the beginning of those wars.”

    Milley also took the opportunity to challenge the notion that wars could be won without boots on the ground and that these land operations would only require Special Forces. Milley, who served as a Green Beret, said wars were about “imposing your political will,” and the idea that the U.S.’s most elite troops could win wars on their own has long been fought by Special Forces commander General Raymond Thomas himself. Thomas said in May that his forces were not the “ultimate solution to every problem” and, in fact, were “suffering” from 15-and-a-half years of continuous combat, which included deployments in about 138 nations, or 70 percent of the world, in 2016. Milley said Thursday that there were currently about 180,000 soldiers in 180 countries across the globe, including active combat zones such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

    Syria has proved to be a particularly tough terrain for the U.S. military. Unlike the U.S.’s post-invasion battles against jihadist organizations in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S.’s presence in Syria has been rejected by the country’s government, which prefers Russia and Iran. Special Forces continue to back the mostly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces, but the Pentagon is cutting ties with formerly CIA-backed insurgents more focused on toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad than taking on the Islamic State militant group (ISIS). As ISIS loses its grip on its final Syrian territories, Thomas said last week that the U.S. military’s counterterrorism mandate in Syria would likely expire once the militants are defeated, something that could relieve what Thomas has described as a beleaguered force.

    “Are we overused? Are we over-extended, or used inappropriately, and truthfully, that’s something we look at all the time. We are actively trying to work ourselves out of a job everywhere where we are,” Thomas said during the Aspen Security Forum.

    Whereas Thomas sought to scale back the reach of his forces, Milley said Thursday he wants the Army to grow to meet rising demands, a desire that may be hindered by President Donald Trump’s shock Twitter announcement Tuesday that transgender troops would be barred from service “in any capacity.” Milley said Thursday that he had not been informed of the decision and would not alter Army policy until receiving an executive directive.

    Milley also told journalists that the Army could “utterly destroy” the armed forces of nuclear-armed North Korea if need be, but that such a conflict would be “high deadly.” He maintained that armies, navies and air forces alone could not decisively claim victories, however, and that “it takes the full commitment of the entire nation to fight wars.”

  21. #1000
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    25,061
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 78 Times in 76 Posts

    Default Re: World War Three Thread....


    US Defence Secretary Warns North Korea That It Risks The 'End Of Its Regime And The Destruction Of Its People' If It Does Not Back Down And That It Is 'Grossly Outmatched' By The Allied Armies Now Pitted Against It

    August 9, 2017

    US defence secretary James Mattis has issued a dramatic ultimatum to North Korea to 'cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and destruction of its people'.

    In a star warning he said: 'The DPRK should cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people.

    'The DPRK regime's actions will continue to be grossly overmatched by ours and would lose any arms race or conflict it initiates.'

    His comments come amid fears the crisis over North Korea could spiral in to global war after Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un made unprecedented threats to trade devastating missile strikes.

    President Trump tweeted that America's nuclear arsenal is 'far stronger and more powerful than ever before', adding: 'There will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world!'

    His remarks came after Pyongyang's volatile dictator warned he was 'carefully examining' plans to make 'an enveloping fire' around the US island of Guam, which is home to about 163,000 people and a sprawling American military base.

    President Trump earlier made an apocalyptic warning that North Korea faces 'fire and fury like the world has never seen' over its nuclear program.

    America released images of supersonic bombers flying over the Korean peninsula while American airmen in Guam have said they are ready to 'fight tonight'. The North said the training mission 'proves that the U.S. imperialists are nuclear war maniacs'.

    Kim Jong-un's officials today staged a rally in Pyongyang's Kim Il Sung Square where tens of thousands stood in organised rows interspersed with placards and slogans. The giant gathering was a response to tough new sanctions adopted by the UN and spearheaded by Washington.

    As tensions escalated today, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson attempted to play down President Trump's earlier incendiary warning, saying he was just trying to send a strong message in language its leader would understand.

    He explained: 'I think Americans should sleep well at night, have no concerns about this particular rhetoric of the last few days.'

    He added: 'I think what the president was just reaffirming is that the United States has the capability to fully defend itself from any attack, and our allies, and we will do so.'

    In his tweet earlier, Trump reaffirmed his threat from a day earlier by reposting video of him warning that Pyongyang would be 'met with fire and fury like the world has never seen' if it made more threats to the US.

    He added: 'My first order as President was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before....'

    Kim, who boasts that his intercontinental rockets can reach the west coast of America, has warned the US that it would 'pay dearly' for UN sanctions it successfully imposed over the weekend, which were backed by China and Russia.

    Amid heightened tensions in the region, Beijing staged 'large-scale' military exercises with dozens of ships, fighter jets and submarines adjacent to the Korean Peninsula on Monday - just months after moving 150,000 troops to its border with North Korea.

    Russia, meanwhile, moved military equipment including helicopters and combat vehicles to its southern frontier with the hermit state earlier this year. Moscow has displayed its own frightening military strength at a war games event in Siberia this week and during a vast Navy Day parade in Vladivostok - about 100 miles from North Korean territory.


    Kim Jong-un has angered the international community by test firing missiles into the sea between North Korea and Japan in recent weeks. Last year, the 33-year-old tyrant ordered the country's fifth nuclear test amid fears he has an arsenal of 60 bombs and has produced a miniaturized warhead for his missiles.

    The isolated, Stalinist state often speaks of turning the capital of neighbour South Korea into a 'sea of fire' and frequently warns of 'merciless' and unprecedented attacks on its enemies, including nuclear strikes on the United States.

    But Trump has responded with his own threats and told reporters on Tuesday: 'North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States.'

    His tweets today read: 'My first order as President was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before....

    '...Hopefully we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world!'

    In June, Trump sent the giant aircraft carriers USS Carl Vinson and the USS Ronald Reagan to the Korean peninsula in a dramatic show of force with officials reiterating America's 'ironclad commitment' to protecting allies in South Korea in Japan. This was followed by a successful test of America's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in Alaska two weeks ago.

    Last night pictures emerged showing supersonic B-1B bombers flying out from Guam Air Force base. North Korea said the exercise 'proves that the U.S. imperialists are nuclear war maniacs'.

    During a ten-hour mission on Monday, the aircraft flew from Guam's Andersen Air Force Base towards Kyushu, Japan, the East China Sea, and the Korean peninsula.

    North Korea said the exercise 'proves that the U.S. imperialists are nuclear war maniacs' while officials in Guam say they have been reassured by the White House that 'America will be defended.'

    But US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson - who is on a plane to Guam - addressed the escalating tensions this morning, saying 'I do not believe that there is any imminent threat' from North Korea, and 'Americans should sleep well at night'.

    The bomber mission was the first for the aircraft and crews recently deployed from South Dakota's Ellsworth Air Force Base to support U.S. Pacific Command's Continuous Bomber Presence missions, Pacific Air Forces Public Affairs stated.

    'How we train is how we fight and the more we interface with our allies, the better prepared we are to fight tonight,' one of the pilots with the 37th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron B-1 said.

    The crews practiced intercept and formation training, which gave them an opportunity to improve their combined capabilities and tactical skills.

    'These flights with Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK) demonstrate solidarity between Japan, ROK and the U.S. to defend against provocative and destabilizing actions in the Pacific theater,' according to a release from the Air Force.

    Germany this morning urged North Korea and the United States to show 'restraint' following their mounting war of words.

    'We are watching the increasing rhetorical escalation regarding the Korean Peninsula with the greatest concern,' foreign ministry spokesman Martin Schaefer told reporters. 'That is why we call on all sides to use restraint.'

    Schaefer said Berlin was convinced a 'military option' could not be 'the answer in the quest for a nuclear weapon-free Southeast Asia'.

    He urged the international community to 'thoroughly implement' the latest round of sanctions against North Korea approved by the United Nations Security Council.

    And he backed a call by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to resume talks with Pyongyang if it halts ballistic missile tests.

    'We must all continue our diplomatic efforts - it is the only way to ensure that the threat of the illegal North Korean nuclear weapons programme can be contained,' he said.

    Calling the situation on the Korean Peninsula 'complicated and sensitive', China's foreign ministry issued a statement warning that parties involved in the impasse should avoid 'words and actions that escalate the situation'.

    The European Union said tensions over North Korea can only be resolved by peaceful means with foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini's spokeswoman saying the developments are 'of great concern to the EU.'

    The U.S. released photos of its bomber training mission late on Tuesday - seemingly in response to North Korea's threat to strike Guam.

    A spokesman for the Korean People's Army, in a statement carried by the North's state-run KCNA news agency, had said that its strike plan will be 'put into practice in a multi-current and consecutive way any moment' once leader Kim Jong Un makes a decision.

    The remote island of Guam - a 210-square-mile dot 2,128 miles from North Korea in the Pacific - is a key US military outpost and home to some 6,000 US troops spread across facilities including the sprawling Anderson Air Force Base, as well as Naval Base Guam.

    Roughly 28 per cent of the island is occupied by the U.S. military. The base houses bomber assurance and deterrence missions, including six B-52s which the air force says provide 'strategic global strike capability [to] deter potential adversaries and provide reassurance to allies' and that they are ready to go.

    Residents of the island expressed concern over North Korea's threat.

    'The threat is pretty scary,' Graceful Fiden, 28, of Tumon, Guam told USA Today. 'It's going on further, so we should worry about it. I believe in the military on Guam, together with the U.S.'

    Guam Homeland Security and Civil Defense office issued a statement Wednesday morning saying they are working with military officials to 'continue to monitor the recent events surrounding North Korean and their threatening actions.'

    'As of this morning, we have not changed our stance in confidence that the U.S. Department of Defense is monitoring this situation very closely and is maintaining a condition of readiness, daily,' stated George Charfauros, Homeland Security adviser.

    'We will continue to keep the public updated on any changes or requests for action. For now, we advise the community to remain calm, remember that there are defenses in place for threats such as North Korea and to continue to remain prepared for all hazards.'

    The release stated that there is no imminent threat to the safety of Guam's 160,000 residents and visitors of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).

    In addition, Gov. Eddie Calvo said he had spoken to Joint Region Marianas Cmdr. Rear Admiral Shoshana Chatfield, who confirmed there was no immediate threat to Guam.

    'My Homeland Security Advisor who is in communications with Homeland Security and Department of Defense notes that there is no change in threat level resulting from North Korea events,' Calvo said in a statement.

    'Additionally, I have reached out to the White House this morning,' Calvo said.

    'An attack or threat to Guam is a threat or attack on the United States. They have said that America will be defended.'

    Earlier Tuesday, in another statement citing a different military spokesman, North Korea also said it could carry out a pre-emptive operation if the U.S. showed signs of provocation.

    Earlier Pyongyang said it was ready to give Washington a 'severe lesson' with its strategic nuclear force in response to any U.S. military action.

    The statement from the North comes after Trump told the country's leader Tuesday that additional threats of violence against the U.S. 'will be met with fire and the fury like the world has never seen.'

    'He has been very threatening beyond a normal state, and as I said they will be met with the fire and fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before,' Trump added in remarks at the top of an unrelated meeting.

    He stopped just short of a firm promise to declare war on Kim's government if the dictatorship continues to talk about 'physical action' to the U.S.

    'North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States,' Trump cautioned after a reporter asked him about the nuclear standoff.

    Trump told the world Tuesday morning that it must be vigilant against North Korea in the face of new threats from the country's young dictator.

    Kim had warned the United States that it would pay 'pay dearly' for the United Nations sanctions regime it successfully imposed over the weekend and hinted at military action as tensions continued to escalate.

    'Physical action will be taken mercilessly with the mobilization of all its national strength,' North Korea's state-run news agency said Tuesday.

    The 33-year-old Kim was lashing out at a U.S. push to drain him of the hard currency he needs to develop his nuclear program that Russia and China reluctantly signed on to last weekend.

    The sanctions put a hard stop to a third of North Korea's export revenue - a deafening blow to the country's economy.

    Trump celebrated the universal participation of Security Council countries in the sanctions with a tweet this morning that said, 'After many years of failure,countries are coming together to finally address the dangers posed by North Korea. We must be tough & decisive!'

    A Washington Post report on Tuesday suggested that North Korea had invented a miniaturized warhead that it has the capability of attaching to the intercontinental ballistic missiles its been testing.

    The development brings the country dangerously close to its goal of creating of a nuclear weapon that can hit targets in the U.S.

    Alaska, Hawaii and California would be at an especially high risk if Kim's scientists finish the weapons and North Korea decides to use them.

    Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said on Tuesday that he is seriously worried about a possible North Korean missile strike on his state as well as the rest of the United States.

    'There's concern, but there's also pride,' Sullivan said on Fox News's 'The Story' Tuesday. 'Alaska is the cornerstone of our nation's missile defense.'

    He added that Alaska's missile defense battalion 'is literally protecting the country.'

    'The Alaska guard unit there calls themselves the 300, protecting the 300 million,' Sullivan said. 'So that's what they're doing now, protecting us.'

    According to the report, US officials estimate that Kim now has 60 nuclear weapons in his possession.

    By comparison, the US is estimated to have more than 6,800 in its stockpile, and Russia is thought to have 7,000.

    Shortly after Trump's morning message Tuesday, United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley appeared on Fox & Friends to deliver tough talk to North Korea and take a victory lap on sanctions.

    'The United States will respond accordingly, and I think the international community will respond accordingly,' she said of the dangerous actions that Kim could take in response to the punishing actions.

    It's up to North Korean leader to decide whether his response is, 'OK the international community is telling me to stop or he is going to have, you know, a temper tantrum,' she'd said.

    Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy worried that Kim is rejecting the international mandate. 'It sounds like, we are getting closer to a shootin' war,' he told Haley.

    'But we don't run scared,' Haley asserted. 'This had to happen, we had to go after his hard currency, we had to stop it.'

    'How he responds? He's now going to have to think what's the end game? Is he really going to come after the United States knowing what the United States can do back? He's gotta make that calculation,' the high-ranking U.S. diplomat assessed.

    Former President Barack Obama's aide Dan Pfeiffer went after Trump's warning to North Korea on Tuesday.

    Pfeiffer tweeted, 'Don't gloss over the fact that Trump threatened what can only be interpreted as a nuclear attack on North Korea if Kim Jong Un taunts him.'

    On Monday, North Korea promised to 'teach the US a severe lesson' if it puts its military might to the test on the Korean Peninsula.

    'We will, under no circumstances, put the nukes and ballistic rockets on the negotiating table,' North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho said, effectively declining to engage in talks about the nuclear program.

    State-run KCNA news agency meanwhile claimed that North Korea 'will make the US pay dearly for all the heinous crimes it commits against the state and people of this country.'

    KCNA cautioned the U.S. against 'believing that its land is safe across the ocean' in what it described as a 'stern warning to the US.'

    Tuesday it slapped the U.S. again, saying in a statement that appeared in the New York Times: 'Packs of wolves are coming in attack to strangle a nation...They should be mindful that the D.P.R.K.'s strategic steps accompanied by physical action will be taken mercilessly with the mobilization of all its national strength.'

    Kim is fuming over a United Nations Security Council resolution that will cut a billion out of his $3 billion economy annually. The resolution bans North Korea exports of coal, iron, iron ore, lead, lead ore and seafood and blocks off other cash-rich avenues, including joint ventures.

    The U.S. pushed the resolution through the Security Council on Saturday with the aid of Russia and China, North Korea's largest trading partner.

    'Yes, China and Russia were not the easiest, but at the end of the day they came through, and that's all that matters,' Haley said this morning on Fox & Friends of the vote to put heavy penalties on North Korea over its continued nuclear tests.

    China favors deconfliction with North Korea and denuclearization of the Korean peninsula but not the displacement of Kim. Beijing is concerned that a coup would put the country's stockpile of weapons in nefarious hands.

    It joined the U.S. and 13 other nations that sit on the Security Council in approving new sanctions on North Korea, a nation with whom it shares a border, after Washington threatened to restrict access to its financial institutions last week.

    North Korea's ramped up missile tests since Trump took office has the United States pursuing aggressive measures in the region, including Chinese sanctions.

    Military action remains on the table, as well, sparking fears internationally that the conflict will result in war.

    The Trump administration's attempts to pressure North Korea into abandoning its nuclear and missile ambitions have so far gained little traction.

    U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has warned of an 'effective and overwhelming' response against North Korea if it chose to use nuclear weapons but has said any military solution would be 'tragic on an unbelievable scale.'

    The United States has 28,500 troops in South Korea to guard against the North Korean threat. Japan hosts around 54,000 U.S. military personnel, the U.S. Department of Defense says, and tens of thousands of Americans work in both countries.

    Seoul is home to a population of roughly 10 million, within range of massed pre-targeted North Korean rockets and artillery, which would be impossible to destroy in a first U.S. strike.

    A rising number of Republicans - 48 percent - want Trump to go that route. That's a jump from 37 percent in an April CBS News poll.

    A majority of Americans are fearful that Trump is not equipped to go to battle with Kim, though. In the CBS survey, 61 percent of voters expressed doubts.

    Most do not think North Korea will actually try to strike the U.S. with one of the intercontinental ballistic missiles it's been testing, however.

    Nearly seven in 10 Americans think Kim is using the nuclear program to gain power and influence.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 13 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 13 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •