Russia Preparing for Global Conflict

[Sean Osborne]

This thread will probably be a macro version of what this entire Russia forum is about.

I am seeing increasing ever-increasing evidence that Russia is actively preparing for a global conflict of epic proportions. This war is still a few years off - but the building stresses between Russia and the US is almost palpable.

I begin this thread with this report, and will add others detailing the level of Russian preps shortly.



http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_d...967&con_type=1

Rice trades barbs with Russian before Iran meet

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, traded barbs during bad- tempered talks at a foreign ministers' summit in New York on Iran's nuclear program a week ago.

Philip Sherwell

Monday, May 15, 2006

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, traded barbs during bad- tempered talks at a foreign ministers' summit in New York on Iran's nuclear program a week ago. The exchanges provided a candid introduction to diplomacy for Margaret Beckett, Britain's new foreign secretary, who attended the tetchy session at the end of her first full day in the job.
The row, which further undermines hopes of a diplomatic solution to the Iran crisis, reflects deepening rifts between the United States and Russia.
Tension surfaced at a private meeting hosted by Rice in the Waldorf Hotel for the Russian, British, French, German and Chinese foreign ministers, and spilt over into a much-delayed dinner.
One official in Washington said: "It was a pretty extraordinary session and everyone's been talking about it in private since. It was certainly quite an introduction to the rough and tumble of the new job for Mrs Beckett."
Lavrov arrived at the Waldorf for the meeting seething about a speech on Kremlin policies delivered by Dick Cheney, the US vice president, the previous week in Lithuania. The Russian repeatedly complained about the comments and then threatened to veto a Security Council resolution, drafted by Britain and France and backed by the United States, that would force Iran to abandon enrichment of uranium.
Although Moscow has made clear that it opposes any use of mandatory powers, the other ministers were left in no doubt that Lavrov's approach reflected fury over the Cheney speech.
As the mood worsened, Lavrov accused the Americans of seeking to undermine efforts by Britain, France and Germany to solve the crisis. He singled out Nicholas Burns, the State Department's No3, for particular flak, complaining about his criticism of Russian involvement in Iran's Bushehr nuclear plant. Already frustrated, Rice, a Russia expert, took exception to his remarks about Burns and curtly told her guest: "This meeting isn't going anywhere."
The gathering in Rice's suite had been intended as a 30-minute chat before dinner but turned into a two-hour session. By the time the foreign ministers sat down to eat at 10.30pm, their sea bass was shriveled and the bickering continued in front of senior officials.
The next day, foreign ministry officials from the six nations worked to smooth over the row, coming up with a proposal for incentives on trade deals, security guarantees and civilian nuclear if Iran halts enrichment.
The offer represented a major tactical shift by the United States, as Washington had previously refused to back rewards for Iran. Privately, American and European officials doubt it will alter Iran's behavior but believe that it may be the only hope of securing Russian and Chinese backing for stiffer diplomatic measures, including sanctions.
Last week's developments also underscore tensions between Rice and the men who effectively ran US foreign policy during George WBush's first term - Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary. Rice was annoyed that talks on Iran with Lavrov were complicated by the vice president's remarks but Cheney and other hardliners want to send a tough message to Russia and also oppose US overtures to Iran and North Korea.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday he considers "invalid" any European proposals that ask Iran to halt uranium enrichment.

[Sean Osborne]

05.2006 Russian Secret Services Prepare for Global Conflict

Pavel Simonov, AIA Russian section

Russian version Vladimir Putin warns Today Vladimir Putin has delivered his annual message to the country’s Federal Assembly. From the moment of Putin's inauguration as the President of the Russian Federation in 2000, similar event is held every year. Priorities of home and foreign policy of Russia are defined in these “addresses”, and the primary goals of the state apparatus in the field of economy and national security are designated here, too. The theses stated during these appearances, are layed down in the basis of the current work of the governmental bodies, on the basis of these theses the new laws are passed. Annually the Control department of the Presidential administration an account on the "implementation of the main provisions of the address". Although the secret services were almost not mentioned at all in the today's address, a lot of its key theses could be realized only with an active participation of the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) and the Main Intelligence Service (GRU) of the Ministry of Defence. So, the performance of a part of the tasks put before the state machinery by the Russian President, is in the competence of the foreign intelligence authority. In particular it concerns the tasks of achievement by Russia of the “scientific and technological superiority" in the sphere of economy "in the conditions of a severe international competition". In this connection, Putin has especially emphasized that "the state should provide its assistance in the purchase of modern technologies abroad". Against this background, one should expect the further activization of the Russian secret services in the developed western countries in the field of industrial espionage. And, according to the European and American sources, for the last time the given direction has became one of the priorities in the activities of the Russian secret services, first of all the foreign intelligence. The search of "convincing response to the national security threats” does also belong to its direct competence. Among those threats Putin has allocated the "threat of terrorism", in particular, within the frames of local conflicts on the ethnic and religious basis, and also "the dangers connected with the proliferation of the weapons of mass destruction". The Russian President has unequivocally declared that the terrorist organizations do aspire to purchase such kinds of weapons. In a context of the today's appearance and the view of teh remaining tension in the North Caucasus, the continuation of the activity of the Russian secret services against the radical Islamic organizations is to be expected. It is related to the operation of the Federal Security Service (FSB) in the North Caucasus and the CIS countries, in particular, in the Central Asia, and to the operations of the SVR in the regions of the Middle East, South Asia and Western Europe. A significant part of the Putin’s address has been devoted to the issues of modernization of the Russian army with an aim to achieve "an ability to simultaneously combat in a global, a regional, and if it is required – also in several local conflicts". Hereto the implementation of the challenge has been considered by Putin in a direct correlation with the military potential of the western states, first of all the USA. It is absolutely clear, that the readiness of the Russian army to participate in global and regional conflicts in many respects depends on operative potentialities ot the military intelligence (GRU). During the first years of Putin’s rule its main problems were reduced to the gathering of intelligence data and carrying out of special operations within the frame of the local conflict in the North Caucasus. In addition, the Russian power structures appeared to be unable to destroy the opponents of the federal authority in the region. Against this background, the ability of the Russian army to conduct military actions outside its own state, had been reviewed rather skeptically. However, between 2002-2005 the President himself as well as the Defence Minister, the Chief of the General Staff and the Commander of the Air Forces have repeatedly spoken out on the conduct of large-scale operations abroad, under a pretext of the struggle against terrorism. Such opportunity seem the most probable between autumn 2002 and summer 2003. Then the representatives of Moscow openly declared their readiness of carrying out a military operation in the territory of Georgia if the authorities of this country do not cut off activity of the Chechen separatists in its territory. Now Putin has unequivocally set the Russian army a task to come to the scretch in global and regional conflicts. By the way, it follows from his performance that "the basic requirement" to the armed forces consists of "an essential increase of being equiped of the strategic nuclear forces, with modern planes for the long-range aviation, submarines and launchers for the strategic missile forces". It is absolutely clear, that the given task is put not at all with a view to the further conducting of the counterterrorist operations in North Caucasus, and even not in the near abroad, for instance, in Central Asia. It is a question of preparation for participation in the world-scale conflicts. Then the main task of the GRU has been considered first of all from the point of view of special operations in territory of the Western Europe, within the frames of a global conflict with the NATO countries. The fact that the new concept of the Russian President will naturally be reflected in the military intelligence, is confirmed by his today's words about the planned "substantial growth" of the divisions of "radio-electronic intelligence and electronic combat". Besides Putin has declared a necessity to achieve "the intellectual superiority" in the military area. And this in many respects depends on the ability "to reckon with the plans and directions of development of the armed forces of other countries". The Russian President has emphasized in this connection that "we should know about the perspective elaboration” of other countries in the military sphere. It is excessive to once more explain that gathering of information on the "plans" and "elaboration" of such a kind belongs exclusively to the competence of the GRU. Putin's appearance as a whole was impregnated with an idea of the global rivalry with the West in the fields of economy, military sphere and foreign policy. In this way the Russian President has clearly pointed at those who exactly is the main oponent of the Russian secret services and has accordingly designated the priority direction of their operation.

http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=846

[Sean Osborne]

Putin’s Address Heralds Return to Soviet Times — Illarionov

Created: 12.05.2006 14:36 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:55 MSK

Former presidential aide Andrei Illarionov comments on Putin’s key-note speech delivered by the president on May 10 to Russia’s Federal Assembly. Putin’s address shows that Russia has chosen a course towards militarization and sends out a clear signal to restore Soviet-era values and prepare for confrontation with the West.

Putin’s address was full of military rhetoric, Andrei Illarionov told the Ekho Moskvy radio station. “The address contains quite undisguised hints about who now poses the main threat to Russia... We cannot but notice that the way the tasks have been formulated is unprofessional from the military point of view,” he said commenting on the president’s instruction to ensure that Russia should be capable of waging several wars at a time. It would be impossible even for the U.S. to wage several wars at a time, he added.

“This address is not for the world outside Russia, this address is for ourselves, for our own country. The address makes the militarization of life inside the country possible, necessary, substantiated and justified. And this is probably the main goal for the sake of which the statement was made,” Illarionov said.

Illarionov expressed doubt about Putin’s statement that Russia’s defense expenditure is comparable or even lower than that of other nuclear states. The expert said the purchasing power of the Russian ruble as compared to hard currencies had not been taken into account when making calculations. “Russia’s defense expenditure in 2005 amounted to slightly more than 3% of GDP, whereas in Great Britain the figure was 2.77% and 2.5% of GDP in France. Therefore, the percentage share of Russia’s defense expenditure in GDP exceeds the expenditure of Britain or France. It is not lower, as was said in the presidential address.”

“If we compare Russia’s defense budget with that of the USA, it is true that in absolute figures, taking into account the exchange rates, Russia’s military expenditure is 25 times lower than that of the USA. This only proves that the figures which we are using are absolutely the same figures that were used by the aides who were preparing these figures for the address,” Illarionov went on to say. At the same time, he added that “it would be incorrect to compare GDP and military budgets on the basis of exchange rates”.

“All comparable figures should be given not on the basis of exchange rates but on the basis of the so-called purchasing power parity. The thing is that in various countries different quantities of goods of the same consumer quality, so to speak, can be purchased for the same amount of money exchanged at a bank or a currency exchange bureau,” he went on to say. “Calculations made this way will show that Russia’s defense expenditure in 2005, according to the lowest purchasing power parity figures, amounted to approximately 45bn dollars expressed in prices as at 2002. In France, also in 2005, military expenditure amounted to 36bn dollars, also calculated on the basis of purchasing power parity expressed in prices as at 2002, which is about 20 per cent lower than in the Russian Federation. In Great Britain the figure was about 52bn dollars, expressed in the same units, which is about 15 per cent more than in Russia,” Illarionov said. Taking into account that Russia’s GDP is lower than that in France and Great Britain, it turns out that its defense expenditure is comparable to that of the above two countries. Also, Russia’s defense expenditure per capita exceeds that of France and Great Britain by almost 50 per cent, the former presidential aide said.

Illarionov said the method of calculating Russia’s defence expenditure used by the president’s aides to prepare his state-of-the-nation address did not reflect the true state of affairs. “If they have done this to distort the picture on purpose, this is either stupidity or betrayal because, in my opinion, to provide false information to a state leader is a crime,” he said.

According to Illarionov, Putin’s concern over the demographic situation was obviously prompted by the need to have enough men for the armed forces. “It seems that the Defense Ministry is the only institution that understands why it is necessary to solve the demographic problem in Russia,” he said in response to Putin’s remark that at the Defense Ministry they understand quite well the importance of such notions as love, women and children.

Illarionov said average life expectancy has been declining in Russia for the past three years. “We know for sure that this problem cannot be solved by the militaristic methods which our authorities are going to employ. Using these methods can only exacerbate the problem.” No increase in child benefits can solve the problem, he added.

The former presidential aide drew a parallel between the current state of relations between Russia and the West and the situation that took shape after World War II, when the Cold War era began. He said Putin’s current foreign policy statement very much resembled Stalin’s statements before and after Winston Churchill’s speech in Fulton in 1946. The West then interpreted Stalin’s statements as a signal that Russia had begun preparations for another war. According to Illarionov, history repeats itself now that Putin has made a foreign policy statement which can be viewed as an unfriendly response to U.S. Vice-President Richard Cheney’s speech in Vilnius and which can put Russia in opposition to the West.

“What do we see, regrettably, in today’s address? It says that we should not repeat mistakes which we made during the Cold War. In other words, the phrase ’Cold War’ is now used as a starting point for a comparison,” he said. At the same time, Illarionov denied that Cheney’s speech in Vilnius was a challenge to Russia designed to bring the relations between the two countries back to the times of cold war. He quoted the part of the speech where Cheney praised Russia as a great world power which was moving towards democracy, and offered cooperation in fighting common threats.

Illarionov said this was the first address 40 per cent of which was devoted to the armed forces and ways to strengthen them. “Indeed, there has never been an address like this before. In this respect, we are returning to another epoch in which we had lived for more than one decade,” he said.

The ongoing global conflict is not the conflict between the Christian and Islamic civilizations but between the countries which view human life and human rights as the main values and the countries which believe in the supremacy of the state in which an individual can be sacrificed, Illarionov said. “Numerous articles and speeches recently published and delivered by our leaders, including the address which the president delivered today, demonstrate the fundamental difference between our current philosophy, the philosophy of the current Russian authorities and the philosophy which initiated modern civilization and which allowed it to develop and grow strong, the civilization which is based on the individual, on the freedoms, rights and democratic development of the individual,” he said. Illarionov said Putin’s address clearly showed Russia’s choice of philosophy, “the choice — although in a slightly different ideological wrapping — which our country had been following during the pervious 70 years and which led to the greatest geopolitical catastrophe”.

As regards Putin’s proposal that the Russian ruble should be made a fully convertible currency from July 1, 2006, Illarionov said that “the task of making the ruble a fully convertible currency is not essential and not serious in any way”. “A credit history is needed to bring the Russian ruble on a par with the dollar, the euro, the pound and the yen. This history could be quite long, it could take a decade or several decades,” he said. According to Illarionov, a document authorizing the ruble’s convertibility could be signed overnight but it will not make the ruble an equal partner to other currencies straightaway. “A totally different economic policy should be pursued by the authorities, a policy which would not be perceived with apprehension by millions or tens of millions of people throughout the world,” he said.

Illarionov said the president’s proposal that an exchange should be set up in Russia to sell oil and gas for rubles in order to help the ruble become a fully convertible currency shows that the authorities fail to understand how stock markets work. From the economic point of view, it does not matter where wholesale trading in oil, gas, metals or machinery is taking place because these products are not physically involved in transactions at the exchange, he said. “Unfortunately, I should say, with regret, that this shows that the processes of modern world trade and modern world economic relations are not understood in full measure,” he said. It does not matter if Russian oil is sold for rubles or for dollars, he added.

http://www.mosnews.com/commentary/20...rcomment.shtml

[Brian Baldwin]

Excellent article above that really allows a person to see Putin's mind set and views. He's not only dangerous but also an idiot. Those two things rarely mix.

[Ryan Ruck]

Excellent article above that really allows a person to see Putin's mind set and views. He's not only dangerous but also an idiot. Those two things rarely mix.

Mix well... Those two things rarely mix well.

They actually mix all the time. e.g. Karl Marx, Bill Clinton, Adolf Hitler, etc., etc.

[Brian Baldwin]

I suppose we'll end up adding George W. Bush to that list if he gets his way with the immigration crap. But you are correct. Rarely do they mix well.

[Sean Osborne]

The US ABM system postulated for Europe is a defensive system and is not necessarily designed to counter Russian missiles - but Iranian Shihab 3A/3B and 4 missile warheads.

The following BS is unprovoked belligerence from the Russian Armed Forces Chief of Staff, Yury Baluyevsky.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/5081.html

Russia warns it can penetrate US missile defence in Europe
Dadan Upadhyay

Posted online: Thursday, May 25, 2006 at 0000 hrs

Moscow, May 24:Russian Armed Forces Chief of General Staff General Yury Baluyevsky today warned against US plans to deploy missiles in East Europe, saying Russia possessed an appropriate and asymmetric response allowing its intercontinental missiles to penetrate any defence systems.

‘‘We will find and have virtually found appropriate and — I would like to emphasise this — asymmetric solutions, which give us grounds to say that our intercontinental ballistic missiles and their warheads will successfully penetrate both existing and nascent missile defence systems that are being developed today and will be developed tomorrow and in the more distant future,’’ said Gen Baluyevsky.

His remarks came, as Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov announced today that Russia would spend on defence about $29.6 billion (2.6-2.7per cent of GDP) in 2007. He said after a debate on the military development until 2010, in the State Duma, although the Defence Ministry’s budget would continue to grow, its share of GDP would remain unchanged and would ‘‘not be militarist”.

He was referring to President Vladimir Putin’s ‘the state of the nation address’ to joint session of Russian Parliament recently, in which he called for Russian defence spending to be “comparable” to any other nuclear powers.

Who here remembers Russian objections to the Pershing deployment to Europe during the Reagan Administration?

Does the above sound familiar?

[Honza Malina]

Interesting scheme - Russians playing both sides to artificialy provoke a conflict between Russia and America.

This is not good at all.

The whole State Department should be closed down, by now it must be one Russian mole after another.

The policy should be from now on done by the U.S. military based on real military strength on Russia and China - and no diplomacy should be taken into account - but anyway, it is too late.

Rice should be brought on charges of high treason for maneuvering American foreign policy to this fiasco, which is not by coincidence the same as the Russians and Chinese want America to end up in.

They favor diplomacy, because that gives them more ability to slow us down and deceive us even more.

There can be no diplomacy with communist criminals - get it through your head America, what is wrong with you ?

This is so essential for our survival, for freedom, but no, we are buying Chinese slave labor products like they were paid for with honest wages, we are shipping our production ability to the commies just like they will never take advantage of it [yeah, right !], so their war production will be enhanced by our U.S. Investments and we won't have anything substantial left and produced here in America - I am talking about the WW3 time, not now.

Sadly, our compromised government is so disabled to deal with this clear communist threat that one can only begin to think how many of these jokers are in fact already compromised and working [through blakmail] for the Russians etc. ?

I have some name in mind, but names are irrelevant at this point because the whole American culture is bad, it is compromised, it cannot produce anything substantial at this time to counter this horrible situation - and that is what the Russians want, that is the precise time and moment when they will hit us.

Half of our society is atheist and liberal, government run schools are producing Marxist-Leninist brats, sex and hedonistic lifestyle [homosexuality etc.] is rampant to the point that Soddom and Ghomorah people would be ashamed themselves just by seeing this,
well, and the leadership of this country is non-existent.

I am only saying how it is.

The American spirit, since it is not Catholic - nor ever was from the beginning, is now broken because the protection of God is simply not there, because heretics and atheists need not hope for any protection from God [just read Isaias 6 : 11, Ezechiel 38and 39] as they have chosen to rather follow their own foolish human mind in interpreting the Word of God than to follow the Mystical Body of Christ in full.

But that is only the beginning, when we consider other groups in America which will no doubt use such times and try to further their own evil agenda [including aiding the Russian and Chinese enemies] in order to destroy the structure, which in some aspect is a good structure of the government [with only one important fault - God is not present
- for a reference you can read for example encyclical
of St. Pius X Pascendi Dominici Gregis
or the same Pope St. Pius X Our Apostolic Mandate

[BTW Amazon sells this little encyclical for $ 40 - I am not joking !]

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.


Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness.
By separating fraternity from Christian charity thus understood, Democracy, far from being a progress, would mean a disastrous step backwards for civilization. If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic charity alone can lead the people in the march of progress towards the ideal civilization.

-----
When we consider the forces, knowledge, and supernatural virtues which are necessary to establish the Christian City, and the sufferings of millions of martyrs, and the light given by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and the self-sacrifice of all the heroes of charity, and a powerful hierarchy ordained in heaven, and the streams of Divine Grace - the whole having been built up, bound together, and impregnated by the life and spirit of Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of God, the Word made man - when we think, I say, of all this, it is frightening to behold new apostles eagerly attempting to do better by a common interchange of vague idealism and civic virtues. What are they going to produce?

What is to come of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people.

Luther, Henry VIII, French Revolution, Marx, Lenin - WW1, WW2 and now WW3.

That is what the World has produced - by simply disregarding the true teaching of Christ and His Apostolic Church.

It will be costly, but at the end the World [whatever is left of it] will be again Catholic and in harmony, love, true charity and justice.

God Bless this new world to come, but I hope I won't be here anymore, for better home is in Heaven for us, hoping for it and longing to go there, that is the true spirit we should all posses.

Honza

P.S. Smilling and shaking your heads will not help, for again, that lacks the supernatural foundation of your faith, which you should have - and can only have as traditional Catholics.
As my patron Saint St. John the Baptist said :

1 And in those days cometh John the Baptist preaching in the desert of Judea. 2 And saying: Do penance: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of by Isaias the prophet, saying: A voice of one crying in the desert, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths. 4 And the same John had his garment of camels' hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins: and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the country about Jordan:
2 "Do penance"... Paenitentiam agite. Which word, according to the use of the scriptures and the holy fathers, does not only signify repentance and amendment of life, but also punishing past sins by fasting, and such like penitential exercises.