US, S. Korea ‘create army unit to destroy North’s nukes’
September 4, 2014 Qronos 16Leave a commentGo to comments
South Korea said Thursday it would create a combined army unit with the United States, reportedly tasked with destroying North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction in the event of an all-out conflict.
The mechanised unit led by a US major general will be set up in the first half of next year, the South’s defence ministry said, as part of elaborate preparations for any future war between the two Koreas.
“It will be the first combined ‘field combat’ unit to carry out wartime operations,” a defence ministry spokesman said without elaborating on its mission.
If war breaks out, the unit would be tasked with eliminating weapons of mass destruction in the nuclear-armed North, Yonhap news agency said.
The contingent would have a joint office of US and South Korean staff in Uijeongbu, north of Seoul, where the US 2nd Infantry Division guards a strategically important area as a deterrent to an invasion by North Korea.
In the event of a full-scale conflict, the combined unit would absorb a mechanised South Korean brigade and forces from the US division, which is armed with helicopters and other advanced weapons.
Because the Korean conflict ended in an armistice instead of a peace treaty, the two Koreas are still technically at war.
Nearly 30,000 US troops are stationed in the South under a bilateral military accord.
If fresh hostilities broke out, the US commander in South Korea would assume control of the South’s 640,000 troops.
A transfer of command in a wartime setting was set for 2015, which would allow South Korea control its own troops, but the South wants a postponement citing the increased threat from North Korea’s nuclear and missile development.
In June, North Korea announced the successful test of new high-precision, tactical guided missiles.
In the following months the North conducted a series of missile and rocket tests, raising tensions on the Korean peninsula.
Meanwhile South Korea and the United States held an annual military drill in August despite condemnation by North Korea which had threatened a “merciless” retaliatory strike.
The drill simulated the response to a nuclear attack threat for the first time, according to the South’s defence ministry, using a strategy of “tailored” deterrence developed last year in the course of joint defence talks.
UN resolutions bar Pyongyang from conducting any launches using ballistic missile technology. But the North has defended its missile launches as a legitimate exercise in self-defence.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Vladimir Filonov / MTRussian military vehicles drive down Tverskaya Street during rehearsals for the Victory Day military parade in central Moscow May 5, 2014.
A Russian general has called for Russia to revamp its military doctrine, last updated in 2010, to clearly identify the U.S. and its NATO allies as Moscow's enemy number one and spell out the conditions under which Russia would launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the 28-member military alliance, Interfax reported Wednesday.
Russia's military doctrine, a strategy document through which the government interprets military threats and crafts possible responses, is being revised in light of threats connected to the Arab Spring, the Syrian civil war and the conflict in Ukraine, the deputy chief of the Kremlin's security council told RIA Novosti on Tuesday.
But within the Defense Ministry there are voices calling for different priorities.
"First and foremost, the likely enemy of Russia should be clearly identified in this strategic document, something absent from the 2010 military doctrine. In my view, our primary enemy is the U.S. and the North Atlantic bloc," General Yury Yakubov, a senior Defense Ministry official, was quoted as saying by Interfax.
The 2010 doctrine defines NATO expansion as a threat to Russian national security and reaffirms its right to use nuclear weapons in a defensive posture, but stops far short of declaring NATO as Moscow's primary adversary and laying preemptive nuclear strike scenarios on the table, a posture unmistakably reminiscent of the Cold War.
Yakubov said the information war being waged over the crisis in Ukraine — where the West accuses Russia of arming separatists fighting the government in Kiev — and NATO's announcement that it would establish a permanent military presence in Eastern Europe have validated earlier fears that the alliance's claims of non-aggression toward Russia were insincere.
The general added that special attention should be paid to integrating the functions of the newly created Air and Space Defense Forces with Russia's land, sea and air based nuclear forces. "In addition, it is necessary to hash out the conditions under which Russia could carry out a preemptive strike with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces," 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."
Read this shit. Think this through. WHO has nukes in the Middle East again? Oh, Pakistan, India...remember them?
Islamic State claims Pakistan and Afghanistan for its ‘caliphate’
Pakistan and Afghanistan — After imposing its brutal rule in swathes of Iraq and Syria, Isil is claiming Afghanistan and Pakistan as part of its ‘caliphate’ in direct challenge to al-Qaeda
.
Kashmiri demonstrators hold up a flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) during a demonstration in July Photo: AFP
The Islamic State is challenging the Taliban and al-Qaeda in its Afghanistan and Pakistan heartlands and claiming both countries as part of its ‘caliphate’.
Islamic Slate leaflets proclaiming the group’s intention to bring its barbaric form of Islam to Pakistan and Afghanistan were posted throughout Peshawar, the capital of the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa frontier province, in the last few days, and have also been distributed to nearby Afghan refugee camps.
The leaflets, published in the local Pashto and Darri languages and bearing the Isil ‘Fateh’ (victory) flag, said the ‘caliphate’ is had established in Syria and Iraq extended to Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and some Muslim central Asian republics.
They called for unity among Muslims and committed themselves to victory or martyrdom in their fight to recreate the ‘caliphate’.
The group appears to have some powerful allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including one former Guantánamo Bay inmate and some commanders loyal to the Afghan insurgency leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
One of the commanders told the BBC earlier this week that he was willing to join Isil if he was convinced they are sincere in reviving the caliphate – the series of Islamic states and empires which flourished in the Middle East and West Asia from the 7th century until the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
“We are waiting to see if they meet the requirements for an Islamic caliphate… we are sure that our leadership will announce their allegiance to them. They are great mujahideen, Commander Mirwais of the Hizb-i-Islami group, currently fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan, told the BBC.
Islamic State’s arrival in Pakistan is expected to provoke a power struggle among Islamic militants in the area who have traditionally owed allegiance to the Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar, whose supporters regard him as the true ‘caliph’.
The group’s presence emerged shortly before al-Qaida’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri announced it had established a branch of its terror organisation in India to wage a holy war to establish its own ‘caliphate.’
The move was seen as a pre-emptive strike to raise its profile among wealthy donors in the Middle East and to curtail the Islamic State’s imperialist ambitions.
Al-Zawahiri said its new holy war would bring justice for Muslims in India and singled out Gujarat, where India’s prime minister Narendra Modi was chief minister for 12 years and presided over the state during the 2002 riots when an estimated 800 Muslims were killed by Hindu mobs. He also said the new group would operate from Kashmir to Assam and Burma, where Muslim minorities have also suffered communal attacks.
The group would “raise the flag of jihad” under the leadership of Asim Umar, a senior Pakistan-based al-Qaeda propagandist who called on Muslim’s in India’s Jammu and Kashmir to wage a war to “wave Islam’s flag over Srinagar’s Lal Chowk” in a video message earlier this summer.
The Indian government ordered a high alert in a number of states amid fears that any terrorist strike could provoke communal violence between Muslims and Hindus.
Michael Semple, former deputy European Union envoy to Afghanistan and a leading expert on Jihadist groups, said Islamic militants regarded the Indian subcontinent as a part of the old caliphate and that it was to be expected that “as soon as Islamic State gets its act together you will it trying to cover South Asia. And before it goes public with that, al Zawahiri is trying to snap up the volunteers for al-Qaeda.”
Both groups are competing for volunteers and donors but the Islamic State’s success in Iraq and Syria had given it a big advantage over al-Qaeda which appears to have dwindled in recent years.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A Russian defense minister wants his country’s official military doctrine rewritten to allow for a pre-emptive nuclear attack against the United States and NATO, the Russian-language news agency Interfax reports.
Russian Army Gen. Yury Yakubov said the doctrine, last revised in 2010, should be updated to classify the United States and other NATO countries as the “main enemy” of Russia, Interfax reported on Wednesday.
Yakubov, who is from the defense ministry’s inspector general’s office, also said it is time “to hash out the conditions under which Russia could carry out a pre-emptive strike with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces,” according to a translation of the general’s remarks by the English-language Moscow Times.
Russia categorizes its nuclear arsenal as a defensive measure to be used in the event of an imminent attack that threatens the country’s existence, Interfax reported.
Nuclear war talk has crept back into official Russian discourse amid the fighting in Ukraine, where pro-Russia separatists are being armed by Moscow and supported with Russian ground troops.
The United States and the European Union have jointly condemned Russia’s actions in Ukraine and imposed successively harsher economic sanctions. The rhetoric from Moscow has followed suit.
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday told children at a Kremlin-sponsored youth camp, “I want to remind you that Russia is one of the leading nuclear powers.”
Ukraine’s defense minister used Facebook on Monday to charge that Russia “has threatened on several occasions across unofficial channels that, in the case of continued resistance, they are ready to use a tactical nuclear weapon against us.”
The Russian general’s remarks came ahead of joint military exercises between NATO and Ukrainian forces that are scheduled to begin on Sept. 16 and “likely to further fuel suspicions between Moscow and the West,” the Toronto Globe and Mail reported.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NATO SUMMIT NEWS SNIPPETS: ‘ Leaders Approve Creation of Rapid Response Force With HQ in Eastern Europe ‘
Rate This
#AceBreakingNews – NATO – September 05 – Seeking to counter Russian aggression, NATO leaders approved plans Friday to create a rapid response force with a headquarters in Eastern Europe that could quickly mobilize if an alliance country in the region were to come under attack. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said a command headquarters would be set up in Eastern Europe with supplies and equipment stockpiled there, enabling the "spearhead" force to mobilize and deploy quickly. #ANS2014
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
An official from the Internal Security Service (ISS), Estonia‘s national agency for counterintelligence and high-profile corruption investigations, was abducted at gunpoint at Luhamaa border checkpoint this morning where he was discharging service duties, and taken to Russia.
The incident occurred at about 9:00 on the Estonian side of the border and was preceded by jamming of communications and use of a smoke grenade, the agency said; the interference was said to originate from the Russia side.
The ISS said the official was in the process of interdiction of a cross-border crime.
The area is in Võru County, by Russian border post #121. The border is largely demarcated and lacks major fortifications; the area is thinly populated.
The whereabouts of the official are not known, Postimees daily’s online site said.
There was no immediate explanation on the late disclosure of the incident – more than six hours after it occurred – which comes during a period of more tense relations with Russia.
Officials from the ISS (KaPo in Estonian) and the Office of the Prosecutor General have called a press conference for 17:00, which is now in progress.
Meanwhile, criminal case formalities (kidnapping and illegal border crossing) have been launched.
Officials at Press Conference: Bilateral Border Guard Meeting Was Held at 13:00
Arnold Sinisalu, director general of the ISS, said that Estonian and Russian border guards met for a briefing at the Estonians’ initiative at 13:00. At the meeting on the border, the Russian side said it had no reports of the incident. Both sides visited the scene and established that there were indeed signs of a violent struggle. Sinisalu added that there was no indication of a firefight…(read more)
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/04/2014 23:07 -0400
While NATO is contemplating its existential purpose in a world where the Cold War has suddenly come back with a vengeance, and the military alliance has found itself woefully unprepared to deal with a Russia which no longer accepts the supremacy of the west (appropriately enough NATO is doing this on a golf course) Russia is also strategizing, only instead of issuing "sharply-worded catchphrases" and hashtags, a Russian general has called for Russia to revamp its military doctrine, last updated in 2010, to clearly identify the U.S. and its NATO allies as Moscow's enemy number one. That in itself is not disturbing: we reported as much yesterday and is merely more rhetorical posturing.
Where things, however, get very problematic is that the general demands that Russia spell out the conditions under which the country would launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the 28-member military alliance.
Moscow Times reports that Russia's military doctrine, a strategy document through which the government interprets military threats and crafts possible responses, is being revised in light of threats connected to the Arab Spring, the Syrian civil war and the conflict in Ukraine, the deputy chief of the Kremlin's security council told RIA Novosti on Tuesday.
That however is the soundbite for politically correct media purposes. Because within the Defense Ministry there are voices calling for different priorities.
"First and foremost, the likely enemy of Russia should be clearly identified in this strategic document, something absent from the 2010 military doctrine. In my view, our primary enemy is the U.S. and the North Atlantic bloc," General Yury Yakubov, a senior Defense Ministry official, was quoted as saying by Interfax.
If this sounds like a statement taken right out of the (first) Cold War, one involving the whole nuclear arms race, is because it is. The 2010 doctrine defines NATO expansion as a threat to Russian national security and reaffirms its right to use nuclear weapons in a defensive posture, but stops far short of declaring NATO as Moscow's primary adversary and laying preemptive nuclear strike scenarios on the table, a posture unmistakably reminiscent of the Cold War.
At the basis of this dramatic escalation is none other than Russia's stated response to what it perceives as a clear expansionary NATO threat.
Yakubov said the information war being waged over the crisis in Ukraine — where the West accuses Russia of arming separatists fighting the government in Kiev — and NATO's announcement that it would establish a permanent military presence in Eastern Europe have validated earlier fears that the alliance's claims of non-aggression toward Russia were insincere.
And the punchline: the general added that special attention should be paid to integrating the functions of the newly created Air and Space Defense Forces with Russia's land, sea and air based nuclear forces. "In addition, it is necessary to hash out the conditions under which Russia could carry out a preemptive strike with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces," he said.
One can be certain that this is precisely what Russia will do.
So what happens next?
Recall what former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said in November 2008 in his first presidential address to the Russian people: "Russia will deploy Iskander missile systems in its enclave in Kaliningrad to neutralize, if necessary, the anti-ballistic missile system in Europe." An anti-ballistic missle system also known as NATO.
Which it did less than a year ago, long before the Ukraine civil war was headline news every day. This is what happened the last time Russia flexed its nuclear deterrence muscles, in November of 2013.
Russia has stationed missiles with a range of about 500 kilometers in its Kaliningrad enclave and along its border with the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Germany’s Bild-Zeitung reports, citing defense officials it didn’t identify. Satellite images show a “double-digit” amount of mobile units identified as SS-26 Stone in NATO code. Missiles were stationed within the past 12 months. SS-26 can carry conventional as well as nuclear warheads.
This is merely Russia being true to its warning word. From April 2012:
Moscow reiterated on Tuesday it may deploy Iskander theater ballistic missiles in the Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad that will be capable of effectively engaging elements of the U.S. missile defense system in Poland.
NATO members agreed to create a missile shield over Europe to protect it against ballistic missiles launched by so-called rogue states, for example Iran and North Korea, at a summit in Lisbon, Portugal, in 2010.
The missile defense system in Poland does not jeopardize Russia’s nuclear forces, Army General Nikolai Makarov, chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, said.
“However, if it is modernized…it could affect our nuclear capability and in that case a political decision may be made to deploy Iskander systems in the Kaliningrad region,” he said in an interview with RT television.
“But that will be a political decision,” he stressed. “So far there is no such need.”
A little over two years later, there is a need.
Which means forget "little green men" in Ukraine. Think massive Russian Iskander ICBM systems planted on the border with Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics and all across Russia Western border, and the furious screamfest this would waterfall into.
We can't wait to see how algos will spin such pre-emptive steps to a very mushroom cloudy World War III...
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."
This opinion is from ‘The Man Who Would Be King’ …or more likely a man who would have been a United States Commanding General Officer in my estimation. I have no doubt he would have gone to the top. He was a young Colonel when he resigned.
I have trained with this guy and he is extremely intelligent and one of the most impressive military people I have met… and it takes a lot to impress me because I was Special Ops and I’ve seen and dealt with about every way, shape and form of officer… in combat and not.
He still has that subtle aurora of a quietly confident and capable leader. He maintains broad intelligence and military contacts. He would fit right in with a SF Delta ‘snatch and grab’ team. He’s fit beyond compare at his age, a tactician and deadly with weapons… fire and movement type use of weapons, not just shooting holes in paper targets… witnessed first hand.
Unlike some generals, who were personal and ideological friends of presidents, a few polished the leather seats of their chairs with their pork chops and were appointed up through the ranks by their “Commander-In-Chief.”
All done without the judgment of or ever subject to sitting even one Peer General Officers Promotion Review Board judging them for each star they gained as all other General Officers must do. A mainstream news media consultant and commentator former general comes to mind.
I asked this man if he resigned because Obama was black. He stared at me for a moment with disdain and I could see in his look the unspoken declaration… ‘I don’t judge by the color of skin or the shape of eyes… you know that!’
He then said… “Unlike 99.9% of Americans and other officers, I read Obama’s two books, probably written by someone other than him… like Bill Ayers.”
“I am still unable to fathom the depths of the stupidity of people electing this fraud even as he laid out his plans for this country’s demise well before his election for all to clearly see. What his direction and intentions were made the Clintons look like amateurs.”
I wondered why he didn’t stay to help keep the ship upright and his answer was… “I saw how his predecessor Clinton had gutted the military. I resigned because I knew that I would be forced to resign or would go under questionable circumstances… like drummed up accusations.”
“Remaining in a command position would be a political chess game and I held my beliefs above all else including my career. I have been too vocal in my belief in the United States Constitution and on keeping our military strong, regardless of all other issues. I knew I was a target. I submitted my resignation as my symbolic protest on his inauguration day.”
This guy has been writing and posting ever since Obama’s election trying to alert people to the road of destruction we’re on. He’s been uncannily accurate. Like he says… “Simply read Obama’s books and look at America and the world through his eyes as and you will see why he does what he does.”
We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or monument to ourselves. So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as a possible outcome.
This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…
Subject: War and then some (Part I)
A new war that some are labeling WWIII is being discussed by pundits on a continuing basis as of late. In fact, so many articles are being written on the topic that it’s difficult to go a day without seeing a new version. Some are well done and have a good basis in fact. Others are meant to simply scare people into a mode of thought or reaction. Many miss the entire logic/strategy of warfare and oversimplify the outcomes.
In my thinking, a war of the magnitude being discussed will not leave the world a better place; far from it. But, I have been asked several times recently about my “take” on events and who could come out the victor. Honestly, I have difficulty choosing a victor in the war I see coming. No one will come through undefeated, unscarred and the survivors will be forever changed.
I will try to be as logical and unbiased as possible. Keeping it altruistic also keeps it realistic to my mind. To be sure, after nearly 40 years with DOD, I have my prejudices. Serving in and supporting several wars/conflicts during that time also moulds one’s thoughts.
I will wade into this grim topic this one time.
I will not be all inclusive in my thoughts, nor will I discuss every potential outcome or path. One thing I have learned from life and history is that once the fighting begins plans, motives and desires change. The heavyweights can lose and the victor does not always get the spoils. Warfare is never static and when you hold still, even for an instant, is probably when you will get shot.
The next war has already begun. It will be asymmetrical (very overused phrase but in this case accurate) and it will be multi-layered. The cyber/financial moves have begun and are laying the groundwork for actual killing. Our vaunted DOD networks have been attacked repeatedly with varying degrees of success for nearly a decade. Mostly, we believe, by Chinese but also by Russian hackers. These are not guys sitting in their underwear in their bedrooms.
These are State-sponsored centers with thousands of experts using the best their nations can offer to penetrate our networks. On the civil side they have hacked power plants, water purification systems, electrical grid computers, etc. all over the country. They have raided the largest banking systems on the planet and gained vast amounts of personal data, financial dealings and confidential records. This is a side of warfare only discussed 20 years ago and now it is a reality for us all.
Financially, the single largest area open to attack is the petro-dollar. That is the U.S. hegemony in world trade currency and keeps the financial power centered here. This enables us, simply put: to maintain our life style, control relative inflation and dominate all other nations with our money. No major trade deals could be made without first changing other currency into dollars.
The status of owning the world’s reserve currency is an advantage we have enjoyed since the end of WWII. However, when Nixon divorced the dollar from its ties to gold, things starting going south and have only gained momentum since. I won’t detail the pitfalls and downturns here; but suffice it to say, other nations are now trading everything, including oil, in their own currencies or gold. This is crushing our financial network. It is forcing nations to re-evaluation of the dollar on a world wide basis.
How weak this has made us is debatable, but its effects are there for all to see; and it’s getting worse. Those are the first “shots fired” of the war with the U.S. These changes are forcing Barry to be more aggressive; something he is not good at nor enjoys. His short-sighted, immature reactions is what I believe will push us into physical conflict. Now let’s touch on more tangible ones.
The nation-states that I view as the most likely antagonists are China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, with possibly secondary support coming from countries like Cuba, Marxist regimes in South America, Africa and possibly Vietnam. It is widely known several of these nations have mutual defense agreements in place with the U.S. as their focal point.
Non-nation state aligned but still dangerous to us and our allies are ISIS, AQ, Hezbollah and all of the subset radical Muslim groups. None of them are limited by international boundaries and are difficult to force into a set piece confrontation (ring a bell with Vietnam vets?). My thoughts here are not all will enter into the foray; but most will play a part one way or another.
The secondary piece of this is how the radicals will deal with nation-states that pay them little heed once the fighting is joined. They are not to be trusted, which could confuse things further than they already are.
On the U.S. side stands Great Britain, Australia, Japan and possibly Israel, South Korea, the rest of NATO and the Philippines. After Japan, this list gets sketchy because we just don’t know who will actively participate or stay home and cover up to avoid getting hit. You could also throw in Pakistan but they are an odd entity that can go any direction.
Let’s not forget many of the above named nations on both sides are nuclear, whether declared or not. Most have ICBM capability or at least sub-orbital launch abilities. All can deliver bombs via aircraft. However, only the U.S., Russia and possibly China have a strategic bomber fleet. There are several, on both sides, that have nuclear or super-quiet diesel subs that can launch a variety of surface ship killing or land attack hardware.
Another fly in the pudding is the chem/bio option. Most major nations have a program, again, whether they admit to it or not. We have confirmed that ISIS is in control of at least some of Syria’s former stockpile and have drawn up plans for its “distribution”.
This could take us into another area of destruction so vile that the elites may get their wish: to kill all but 500 million of the worlds population. Certainly, Bill Ayers would get his 20-25 million dead in the U.S., just maybe not all the ones he would like to see killed. The point here is chem/bio is the poor man’s nuclear weapons. Don’t discount their threat or use in WWIII.
In Part II of this saga, I will outline strengths and weaknesses of both sides and some potential hot spots that may send this into a shooting war. And, for those who really get off on that stuff, possible outcomes.
Stand by.
A View From A Professional: War And Then Some – Part II, Plus Some Q&A
This is just an opinion and food for thought. As we stated earlier in Part I…
“We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or a monument to ourselves.”
“So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as possible outcomes.” “This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…”
Subject: War and then some (Part II)
There are many people out there with great insights on just where it may ignite. And, some may be correct, either by guess or by skill. What I have discovered is that without the top secret briefs, I can still get pretty close to things. So, the following is my hat upon the wind.
The top two fire storms that will burn us are Ukraine and Syria. There are sub-areas that could ignite and at least one in the Pacific that may occur, unlooked for by most, but eastern Europe and Syria are the best bets.
Let’s look at them in a bit more detail:
Ukraine: I won’t delve into the internal strife/politics of the country. Fascists vs commies just doesn’t get me excited. However, this week the European and American NATO countries are meeting and that will be the number one topic discussed. Of the euro-trash, only Germany matters.
They are the de facto leaders, the bankers, the senior nation that still has control of its destiny. The rest have sold their souls to debt and socialism and will follow the German lead.
Barry has been humiliated time and again by Putin. He has come out second best in discussions, confrontations and in strategy. To seemingly counter this frustration, fighters have been moved forward from U.S. bases and from Great Britain. Armor elements have been reassigned for a six month window from the U.S. to eastern Europe for “exercises”. Stored tanks and Bradleys have been pulled out are being serviced.
This is at a time when the military has been cut by over a trillion dollars over the next decade. This is at a time when the Army is the smallest it’s been since post WWII. This is at a time when the U.S. is falling behind in fighter development, repair parts, closing forward air bases and pissing away intelligence assets.
But Barry’s ego is on the line and he wants this – he needs this.
Syria: The revolt against Assad has been on-going for 18 months. The Syrian leader has stayed in power and survived (if you can call hiding survival for a national leader) due to Russian support – mainly logistics of all classes of supply and intelligence.
This is where it gets interesting. Barry is getting shoved by advisers to be more aggressive with ISIS. His comment recently about not having a plan to deal with them is only partially true. The military has been spun up for months on targets with surprisingly good intel.
But Barry could not be bothered. He hates the military and U.S. power but after six years of disregard and contempt, he is realizing there are times and places it’s good to be the big kid on the block.
The fly in the pudding is Russia. They have pledged openly to defend Syria against all comers. They are in Assad’s corner. Interestingly, by bombing ISIS targets we are helping the side Barry wanted to oust, so Russia will watch closely but do nothing.
The rub will come if Barry commits troops to take on ISIS. Any excuse will do. We have had two beheadings in three weeks of American journalists. The hue and cry for war is building on all fronts at home.
If Barry commits troops Russia will likely back off but move full tilt into Ukraine, not to be outdone. I believe these are two white hot regions and we have not the leadership nor the strength morally to keep us off the spit.
In hardware, it is difficult to get good measures on nations as of late. China claims much in manpower (100 million man army) and a growing nuclear capability but only smiles when asked about chem/bio, submarine capabilities and growing air power.
We know they are or have developed a long range bomber but have not mastered mid-air refueling. They have somewhere between 8-15 nuclear subs and it’s classified how many are potential boomers vs attack subs. They have launched their first aircraft carrier but it is not ready for prime time.
It took us a generation to master air-ops; it will be the same for them. They are not strong enough to take us on face to face but combined with their new found ally, Russia, they could muster the courage to move on us.
Russian air power has increased noticeably in the last several years with at least two new fighters already being tested. Their navy has never recovered from the collapse but they have expanded their sub fleet in recent years.
Their boomers are now putting to sea fully armed. Their Backfire bombers are again pushing our Alaskan airspace and their vaunted armor capability has increased in number and type in the last five years.
They are deploying three new medium/long range missile systems in the near term. Putin has threatened us openly with nuclear strikes if we interfere in several areas, including the two I mentioned earlier.
Both Russia and China have anti-satellite capability and fully understand how much the U.S. depends on our eyes in the sky to manage the battle space. They have closely watched us fight two major campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
They know they cannot match our technology nor our war-fighting capabilities.
So what the hell?
You thought this was about WWIII?
It is.
Our enemies are not stupid and they have the patience of Job. They have attacked us, baited us, mocked us, showed us the middle finger, and dared us to move against them. They have been testing the people of this nation and its leadership.
They know they have a patsy in charge. They know the people are sick of war, but will still rally to a cause. They know we are broke and living on borrowed time. They know we are fully exposed to EMP attack, that we are blind without our satellites and our forces have never recovered materially or physically from 10 years of war.
They also know they cannot win against us and our few allies face to face in a short, hard war. Nope, can’t do it. So they want a protracted ground war. Even with WMDs, they have the manpower to defeat us.
They blind us, EMP the homeland, nuke several key but isolated bases that are crucial to our defense and we are hurt beyond recovery. They know we have no senior military leadership capable of fighting a global war. Barry has purged them from his grasp.
The question then presents itself: can we strike hard enough, fast enough and far enough to back them off?
No. They use EMPs and take our eyes out, our logistics train dries up, and we cannot make war, at least not for long.
Our 2000 aircraft in the Pacific can certainly be used in Europe, once we get them there. But I know first hand the number of parts our aircraft needed when they were flown from the States to the middle east in 1990. A bunch.
And we have a fraction of the logistical strength we had then. A Russian general stated once that logistics is an art form for the U.S. We have learned our lessons well in two world wars and several smaller conflicts. If you can’t power project through support, your fighters, tanks, and men are targets.
Our enemies know this. They have waited for someone to take us down internally so they could finish the job externally. They may not have this opportunity again. They have to take it.
They will get us involved overseas in a war we have no business in and they will strike us, hard. Our ten aircraft carrier groups are worth ten of their tactical nukes.
Over half are docked at any given time so targeting them is much easier. Our submarine force, still the largest in the world has lost thousands of trained men and lack the money to train the new ones effectively. We have lost the edge in naval forces and it’s getting worse every month.
For sure, we will hit back. Our few boomers that are loaded (unclassed info says some still are) will hit military targets, troop concentrations and shipyards. The enemy will pay a horrible price for their transgressions.
But they will be better off than we are.
They have backups. We do not.
They have shelters we do not, they have hardened equipment we do not. They have manufacturing we do not. And they have gold we do not (to purchase raw materials, bribe fence-sitters, etc).
I believe the war will end with our demise at some level. Maybe partially occupied (Alaska, Guam, Diego Garcia, etc) but certainly a shadow of our former selves. Our enemies will be taken aback by their losses but will still manage to come out ahead.
We have the hardware to win, even now. But I believe we lack the will and that will add much in the final counting.
Some Q&A:
My answers to questions I’ve been asked:
Several questions have come back at me from my two part war memo. Let me highlight the questions and answer them the best I can. The questions are paraphrased from the original for brevity.
Question: If Russia/China are our largest enemies how is ISIS going to play? And does Iran just sit this out?
I believe the Russo/Chicom alliance will be our prime antagonist; however, both nations are very adept at using puppets when needed. They will use ISIS, Iran and North Korea to full advantage up to and including the launching of WMD’s against our forward bases or the nation itself.
The advantage then will be the two big guys can deny knowledge and turn away or continue the attack on their terms, depending on the swiftness/lethality of our response. Either way, we will be heavily hit and weaker if forced to fight the first string.
Question: What will be happening to Israel during all of this? Will they just sit this one out and let us take the beating?
Barry has so alienated our number one ally in the middle east it is difficult to count on them beyond intelligence sharing. They will have to face down Iran, at least; possibly with Russian help. Israel is a nuclear power and no one wants them to go into their “destroy all attackers” mode with a massive launch.
Right now, they are number one in the middle east. They are also very easily destroyed due to their small physical size. I believe they will fight or at least be forced into it but bottom line: I do not see them surviving the assault.
The upside is: I don’t see Iran or southern Russian forces faring well either. That “take all, win all” attitude just may preclude a WMD type attack on Israel. They may just be surrounded and conquered by attrition. There simply is no good answer on that one.
Question: How long would it take to arm our subs and put them back to pre-Clinton era condition for our defense/offense?
Too long. As I briefly mentioned, in the last 20 years we have lost 100% of the crews that fought the Cold War against the Russian subs. The skills, knowledge and experience is gone. Some was passed on but since the early 90’s the U.S. has had no real submarine opponent.
Sure, the Chicoms have subs and we have played with them but they have not been a “blue water” threat until just recently. That means we have played ball against the home team and don’t have the experience against another, more aggressive group. It’s like always shooting bullseye targets then suddenly being dropped into a close-support fire fight. Lots of differences.
Question: What real support would you see coming out of Europe?
Very little. They would work with us on intelligence gathering and possibly some material support but I would not count on troops or fleets of either aircraft or ships.
Remember: Europe was torn apart by two major wars in less than 30 years. If they can sit this one out and work with the victors, they will. We are the prize and have been since 1945. If we don’t work at staying on top, someone will work to take us down and that is exactly what is happening.
Final note: I wrote this entire piece by request. It was not my first choice nor even something I had considered doing on my own. I have a number of friends that I send comments to occasionally about events and coming attractions.
I do not sell myself as a “know it all” on the world political stage, nor even about up to the minute military strategies. What I do know is that thousands of pages of research and hundreds of hours studying current events show an unmistakable direction for our nation.
At this point in time it cannot be reversed, and the outcomes I predict or that others may come up with will happen.
Time is not our ally – it is only a measurement of how long we have left.
Drudge headline, 1010EDT, 8 SEPT 14
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
This opinion is from ‘The Man Who Would Be King’ …or more likely a man who would have been a United States Commanding General Officer in my estimation. I have no doubt he would have gone to the top. He was a young Colonel when he resigned.
I have trained with this guy and he is extremely intelligent and one of the most impressive military people I have met… and it takes a lot to impress me because I was Special Ops and I’ve seen and dealt with about every way, shape and form of officer… in combat and not.
He still has that subtle aurora of a quietly confident and capable leader. He maintains broad intelligence and military contacts. He would fit right in with a SF Delta ‘snatch and grab’ team. He’s fit beyond compare at his age, a tactician and deadly with weapons… fire and movement type use of weapons, not just shooting holes in paper targets… witnessed first hand.
Unlike some generals, who were personal and ideological friends of presidents, a few polished the leather seats of their chairs with their pork chops and were appointed up through the ranks by their “Commander-In-Chief.”
All done without the judgment of or ever subject to sitting even one Peer General Officers Promotion Review Board judging them for each star they gained as all other General Officers must do. A mainstream news media consultant and commentator former general comes to mind.
I asked this man if he resigned because Obama was black. He stared at me for a moment with disdain and I could see in his look the unspoken declaration… ‘I don’t judge by the color of skin or the shape of eyes… you know that!’
He then said… “Unlike 99.9% of Americans and other officers, I read Obama’s two books, probably written by someone other than him… like Bill Ayers.”
“I am still unable to fathom the depths of the stupidity of people electing this fraud even as he laid out his plans for this country’s demise well before his election for all to clearly see. What his direction and intentions were made the Clintons look like amateurs.”
I wondered why he didn’t stay to help keep the ship upright and his answer was… “I saw how his predecessor Clinton had gutted the military. I resigned because I knew that I would be forced to resign or would go under questionable circumstances… like drummed up accusations.”
“Remaining in a command position would be a political chess game and I held my beliefs above all else including my career. I have been too vocal in my belief in the United States Constitution and on keeping our military strong, regardless of all other issues. I knew I was a target. I submitted my resignation as my symbolic protest on his inauguration day.”
This guy has been writing and posting ever since Obama’s election trying to alert people to the road of destruction we’re on. He’s been uncannily accurate. Like he says… “Simply read Obama’s books and look at America and the world through his eyes as and you will see why he does what he does.”
We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or monument to ourselves. So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as a possible outcome.
This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…
Subject: War and then some (Part I)
A new war that some are labeling WWIII is being discussed by pundits on a continuing basis as of late. In fact, so many articles are being written on the topic that it’s difficult to go a day without seeing a new version. Some are well done and have a good basis in fact. Others are meant to simply scare people into a mode of thought or reaction. Many miss the entire logic/strategy of warfare and oversimplify the outcomes.
In my thinking, a war of the magnitude being discussed will not leave the world a better place; far from it. But, I have been asked several times recently about my “take” on events and who could come out the victor. Honestly, I have difficulty choosing a victor in the war I see coming. No one will come through undefeated, unscarred and the survivors will be forever changed.
I will try to be as logical and unbiased as possible. Keeping it altruistic also keeps it realistic to my mind. To be sure, after nearly 40 years with DOD, I have my prejudices. Serving in and supporting several wars/conflicts during that time also moulds one’s thoughts.
I will wade into this grim topic this one time.
I will not be all inclusive in my thoughts, nor will I discuss every potential outcome or path. One thing I have learned from life and history is that once the fighting begins plans, motives and desires change. The heavyweights can lose and the victor does not always get the spoils. Warfare is never static and when you hold still, even for an instant, is probably when you will get shot.
The next war has already begun. It will be asymmetrical (very overused phrase but in this case accurate) and it will be multi-layered. The cyber/financial moves have begun and are laying the groundwork for actual killing. Our vaunted DOD networks have been attacked repeatedly with varying degrees of success for nearly a decade. Mostly, we believe, by Chinese but also by Russian hackers. These are not guys sitting in their underwear in their bedrooms.
These are State-sponsored centers with thousands of experts using the best their nations can offer to penetrate our networks. On the civil side they have hacked power plants, water purification systems, electrical grid computers, etc. all over the country. They have raided the largest banking systems on the planet and gained vast amounts of personal data, financial dealings and confidential records. This is a side of warfare only discussed 20 years ago and now it is a reality for us all.
Financially, the single largest area open to attack is the petro-dollar. That is the U.S. hegemony in world trade currency and keeps the financial power centered here. This enables us, simply put: to maintain our life style, control relative inflation and dominate all other nations with our money. No major trade deals could be made without first changing other currency into dollars.
The status of owning the world’s reserve currency is an advantage we have enjoyed since the end of WWII. However, when Nixon divorced the dollar from its ties to gold, things starting going south and have only gained momentum since. I won’t detail the pitfalls and downturns here; but suffice it to say, other nations are now trading everything, including oil, in their own currencies or gold. This is crushing our financial network. It is forcing nations to re-evaluation of the dollar on a world wide basis.
How weak this has made us is debatable, but its effects are there for all to see; and it’s getting worse. Those are the first “shots fired” of the war with the U.S. These changes are forcing Barry to be more aggressive; something he is not good at nor enjoys. His short-sighted, immature reactions is what I believe will push us into physical conflict. Now let’s touch on more tangible ones.
The nation-states that I view as the most likely antagonists are China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, with possibly secondary support coming from countries like Cuba, Marxist regimes in South America, Africa and possibly Vietnam. It is widely known several of these nations have mutual defense agreements in place with the U.S. as their focal point.
Non-nation state aligned but still dangerous to us and our allies are ISIS, AQ, Hezbollah and all of the subset radical Muslim groups. None of them are limited by international boundaries and are difficult to force into a set piece confrontation (ring a bell with Vietnam vets?). My thoughts here are not all will enter into the foray; but most will play a part one way or another.
The secondary piece of this is how the radicals will deal with nation-states that pay them little heed once the fighting is joined. They are not to be trusted, which could confuse things further than they already are.
On the U.S. side stands Great Britain, Australia, Japan and possibly Israel, South Korea, the rest of NATO and the Philippines. After Japan, this list gets sketchy because we just don’t know who will actively participate or stay home and cover up to avoid getting hit. You could also throw in Pakistan but they are an odd entity that can go any direction.
Let’s not forget many of the above named nations on both sides are nuclear, whether declared or not. Most have ICBM capability or at least sub-orbital launch abilities. All can deliver bombs via aircraft. However, only the U.S., Russia and possibly China have a strategic bomber fleet. There are several, on both sides, that have nuclear or super-quiet diesel subs that can launch a variety of surface ship killing or land attack hardware.
Another fly in the pudding is the chem/bio option. Most major nations have a program, again, whether they admit to it or not. We have confirmed that ISIS is in control of at least some of Syria’s former stockpile and have drawn up plans for its “distribution”.
This could take us into another area of destruction so vile that the elites may get their wish: to kill all but 500 million of the worlds population. Certainly, Bill Ayers would get his 20-25 million dead in the U.S., just maybe not all the ones he would like to see killed. The point here is chem/bio is the poor man’s nuclear weapons. Don’t discount their threat or use in WWIII.
In Part II of this saga, I will outline strengths and weaknesses of both sides and some potential hot spots that may send this into a shooting war. And, for those who really get off on that stuff, possible outcomes.
Stand by.
A View From A Professional: War And Then Some – Part II, Plus Some Q&A
This is just an opinion and food for thought. As we stated earlier in Part I…
“We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or a monument to ourselves.”
“So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as possible outcomes.” “This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…”
Subject: War and then some (Part II)
There are many people out there with great insights on just where it may ignite. And, some may be correct, either by guess or by skill. What I have discovered is that without the top secret briefs, I can still get pretty close to things. So, the following is my hat upon the wind.
The top two fire storms that will burn us are Ukraine and Syria. There are sub-areas that could ignite and at least one in the Pacific that may occur, unlooked for by most, but eastern Europe and Syria are the best bets.
Let’s look at them in a bit more detail:
Ukraine: I won’t delve into the internal strife/politics of the country. Fascists vs commies just doesn’t get me excited. However, this week the European and American NATO countries are meeting and that will be the number one topic discussed. Of the euro-trash, only Germany matters.
They are the de facto leaders, the bankers, the senior nation that still has control of its destiny. The rest have sold their souls to debt and socialism and will follow the German lead.
Barry has been humiliated time and again by Putin. He has come out second best in discussions, confrontations and in strategy. To seemingly counter this frustration, fighters have been moved forward from U.S. bases and from Great Britain. Armor elements have been reassigned for a six month window from the U.S. to eastern Europe for “exercises”. Stored tanks and Bradleys have been pulled out are being serviced.
This is at a time when the military has been cut by over a trillion dollars over the next decade. This is at a time when the Army is the smallest it’s been since post WWII. This is at a time when the U.S. is falling behind in fighter development, repair parts, closing forward air bases and pissing away intelligence assets.
But Barry’s ego is on the line and he wants this – he needs this.
Syria: The revolt against Assad has been on-going for 18 months. The Syrian leader has stayed in power and survived (if you can call hiding survival for a national leader) due to Russian support – mainly logistics of all classes of supply and intelligence.
This is where it gets interesting. Barry is getting shoved by advisers to be more aggressive with ISIS. His comment recently about not having a plan to deal with them is only partially true. The military has been spun up for months on targets with surprisingly good intel.
But Barry could not be bothered. He hates the military and U.S. power but after six years of disregard and contempt, he is realizing there are times and places it’s good to be the big kid on the block.
The fly in the pudding is Russia. They have pledged openly to defend Syria against all comers. They are in Assad’s corner. Interestingly, by bombing ISIS targets we are helping the side Barry wanted to oust, so Russia will watch closely but do nothing.
The rub will come if Barry commits troops to take on ISIS. Any excuse will do. We have had two beheadings in three weeks of American journalists. The hue and cry for war is building on all fronts at home.
If Barry commits troops Russia will likely back off but move full tilt into Ukraine, not to be outdone. I believe these are two white hot regions and we have not the leadership nor the strength morally to keep us off the spit.
In hardware, it is difficult to get good measures on nations as of late. China claims much in manpower (100 million man army) and a growing nuclear capability but only smiles when asked about chem/bio, submarine capabilities and growing air power.
We know they are or have developed a long range bomber but have not mastered mid-air refueling. They have somewhere between 8-15 nuclear subs and it’s classified how many are potential boomers vs attack subs. They have launched their first aircraft carrier but it is not ready for prime time.
It took us a generation to master air-ops; it will be the same for them. They are not strong enough to take us on face to face but combined with their new found ally, Russia, they could muster the courage to move on us.
Russian air power has increased noticeably in the last several years with at least two new fighters already being tested. Their navy has never recovered from the collapse but they have expanded their sub fleet in recent years.
Their boomers are now putting to sea fully armed. Their Backfire bombers are again pushing our Alaskan airspace and their vaunted armor capability has increased in number and type in the last five years.
They are deploying three new medium/long range missile systems in the near term. Putin has threatened us openly with nuclear strikes if we interfere in several areas, including the two I mentioned earlier.
Both Russia and China have anti-satellite capability and fully understand how much the U.S. depends on our eyes in the sky to manage the battle space. They have closely watched us fight two major campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
They know they cannot match our technology nor our war-fighting capabilities.
So what the hell?
You thought this was about WWIII?
It is.
Our enemies are not stupid and they have the patience of Job. They have attacked us, baited us, mocked us, showed us the middle finger, and dared us to move against them. They have been testing the people of this nation and its leadership.
They know they have a patsy in charge. They know the people are sick of war, but will still rally to a cause. They know we are broke and living on borrowed time. They know we are fully exposed to EMP attack, that we are blind without our satellites and our forces have never recovered materially or physically from 10 years of war.
They also know they cannot win against us and our few allies face to face in a short, hard war. Nope, can’t do it. So they want a protracted ground war. Even with WMDs, they have the manpower to defeat us.
They blind us, EMP the homeland, nuke several key but isolated bases that are crucial to our defense and we are hurt beyond recovery. They know we have no senior military leadership capable of fighting a global war. Barry has purged them from his grasp.
The question then presents itself: can we strike hard enough, fast enough and far enough to back them off?
No. They use EMPs and take our eyes out, our logistics train dries up, and we cannot make war, at least not for long.
Our 2000 aircraft in the Pacific can certainly be used in Europe, once we get them there. But I know first hand the number of parts our aircraft needed when they were flown from the States to the middle east in 1990. A bunch.
And we have a fraction of the logistical strength we had then. A Russian general stated once that logistics is an art form for the U.S. We have learned our lessons well in two world wars and several smaller conflicts. If you can’t power project through support, your fighters, tanks, and men are targets.
Our enemies know this. They have waited for someone to take us down internally so they could finish the job externally. They may not have this opportunity again. They have to take it.
They will get us involved overseas in a war we have no business in and they will strike us, hard. Our ten aircraft carrier groups are worth ten of their tactical nukes.
Over half are docked at any given time so targeting them is much easier. Our submarine force, still the largest in the world has lost thousands of trained men and lack the money to train the new ones effectively. We have lost the edge in naval forces and it’s getting worse every month.
For sure, we will hit back. Our few boomers that are loaded (unclassed info says some still are) will hit military targets, troop concentrations and shipyards. The enemy will pay a horrible price for their transgressions.
But they will be better off than we are.
They have backups. We do not.
They have shelters we do not, they have hardened equipment we do not. They have manufacturing we do not. And they have gold we do not (to purchase raw materials, bribe fence-sitters, etc).
I believe the war will end with our demise at some level. Maybe partially occupied (Alaska, Guam, Diego Garcia, etc) but certainly a shadow of our former selves. Our enemies will be taken aback by their losses but will still manage to come out ahead.
We have the hardware to win, even now. But I believe we lack the will and that will add much in the final counting.
Some Q&A:
My answers to questions I’ve been asked:
Several questions have come back at me from my two part war memo. Let me highlight the questions and answer them the best I can. The questions are paraphrased from the original for brevity.
Question: If Russia/China are our largest enemies how is ISIS going to play? And does Iran just sit this out?
I believe the Russo/Chicom alliance will be our prime antagonist; however, both nations are very adept at using puppets when needed. They will use ISIS, Iran and North Korea to full advantage up to and including the launching of WMD’s against our forward bases or the nation itself.
The advantage then will be the two big guys can deny knowledge and turn away or continue the attack on their terms, depending on the swiftness/lethality of our response. Either way, we will be heavily hit and weaker if forced to fight the first string.
Question: What will be happening to Israel during all of this? Will they just sit this one out and let us take the beating?
Barry has so alienated our number one ally in the middle east it is difficult to count on them beyond intelligence sharing. They will have to face down Iran, at least; possibly with Russian help. Israel is a nuclear power and no one wants them to go into their “destroy all attackers” mode with a massive launch.
Right now, they are number one in the middle east. They are also very easily destroyed due to their small physical size. I believe they will fight or at least be forced into it but bottom line: I do not see them surviving the assault.
The upside is: I don’t see Iran or southern Russian forces faring well either. That “take all, win all” attitude just may preclude a WMD type attack on Israel. They may just be surrounded and conquered by attrition. There simply is no good answer on that one.
Question: How long would it take to arm our subs and put them back to pre-Clinton era condition for our defense/offense?
Too long. As I briefly mentioned, in the last 20 years we have lost 100% of the crews that fought the Cold War against the Russian subs. The skills, knowledge and experience is gone. Some was passed on but since the early 90’s the U.S. has had no real submarine opponent.
Sure, the Chicoms have subs and we have played with them but they have not been a “blue water” threat until just recently. That means we have played ball against the home team and don’t have the experience against another, more aggressive group. It’s like always shooting bullseye targets then suddenly being dropped into a close-support fire fight. Lots of differences.
Question: What real support would you see coming out of Europe?
Very little. They would work with us on intelligence gathering and possibly some material support but I would not count on troops or fleets of either aircraft or ships.
Remember: Europe was torn apart by two major wars in less than 30 years. If they can sit this one out and work with the victors, they will. We are the prize and have been since 1945. If we don’t work at staying on top, someone will work to take us down and that is exactly what is happening.
Final note: I wrote this entire piece by request. It was not my first choice nor even something I had considered doing on my own. I have a number of friends that I send comments to occasionally about events and coming attractions.
I do not sell myself as a “know it all” on the world political stage, nor even about up to the minute military strategies. What I do know is that thousands of pages of research and hundreds of hours studying current events show an unmistakable direction for our nation.
At this point in time it cannot be reversed, and the outcomes I predict or that others may come up with will happen.
Time is not our ally – it is only a measurement of how long we have left.
Drudge headline, 1010EDT, 8 SEPT 14
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A View From A Professional: War And Then Some – Part I
Posted on September 4, 2014
TELEVISION PROGRAMME....THE WORLD AT WAR... Picture Shows:OPENIN
From over the transom:
An Opinion from ‘The Man Who Would Be King’
This opinion is from ‘The Man Who Would Be King’ …or more likely a man who would have been a United States Commanding General Officer in my estimation. I have no doubt he would have gone to the top. He was a young Colonel when he resigned.
I have trained with this guy and he is extremely intelligent and one of the most impressive military people I have met… and it takes a lot to impress me because I was Special Ops and I’ve seen and dealt with about every way, shape and form of officer… in combat and not.
He still has that subtle aurora of a quietly confident and capable leader. He maintains broad intelligence and military contacts. He would fit right in with a SF Delta ‘snatch and grab’ team. He’s fit beyond compare at his age, a tactician and deadly with weapons… fire and movement type use of weapons, not just shooting holes in paper targets… witnessed first hand.
Unlike some generals, who were personal and ideological friends of presidents, a few polished the leather seats of their chairs with their pork chops and were appointed up through the ranks by their “Commander-In-Chief.”
All done without the judgment of or ever subject to sitting even one Peer General Officers Promotion Review Board judging them for each star they gained as all other General Officers must do. A mainstream news media consultant and commentator former general comes to mind.
I asked this man if he resigned because Obama was black. He stared at me for a moment with disdain and I could see in his look the unspoken declaration… ‘I don’t judge by the color of skin or the shape of eyes… you know that!’
He then said… “Unlike 99.9% of Americans and other officers, I read Obama’s two books, probably written by someone other than him… like Bill Ayers.”
“I am still unable to fathom the depths of the stupidity of people electing this fraud even as he laid out his plans for this country’s demise well before his election for all to clearly see. What his direction and intentions were made the Clintons look like amateurs.”
I wondered why he didn’t stay to help keep the ship upright and his answer was… “I saw how his predecessor Clinton had gutted the military. I resigned because I knew that I would be forced to resign or would go under questionable circumstances… like drummed up accusations.”
“Remaining in a command position would be a political chess game and I held my beliefs above all else including my career. I have been too vocal in my belief in the United States Constitution and on keeping our military strong, regardless of all other issues. I knew I was a target. I submitted my resignation as my symbolic protest on his inauguration day.”
This guy has been writing and posting ever since Obama’s election trying to alert people to the road of destruction we’re on. He’s been uncannily accurate. Like he says… “Simply read Obama’s books and look at America and the world through his eyes as and you will see why he does what he does.”
We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or monument to ourselves. So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as a possible outcome.
This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…
Subject: War and then some (Part I)
A new war that some are labeling WWIII is being discussed by pundits on a continuing basis as of late. In fact, so many articles are being written on the topic that it’s difficult to go a day without seeing a new version. Some are well done and have a good basis in fact. Others are meant to simply scare people into a mode of thought or reaction. Many miss the entire logic/strategy of warfare and oversimplify the outcomes.
In my thinking, a war of the magnitude being discussed will not leave the world a better place; far from it. But, I have been asked several times recently about my “take” on events and who could come out the victor. Honestly, I have difficulty choosing a victor in the war I see coming. No one will come through undefeated, unscarred and the survivors will be forever changed.
I will try to be as logical and unbiased as possible. Keeping it altruistic also keeps it realistic to my mind. To be sure, after nearly 40 years with DOD, I have my prejudices. Serving in and supporting several wars/conflicts during that time also moulds one’s thoughts.
I will wade into this grim topic this one time.
I will not be all inclusive in my thoughts, nor will I discuss every potential outcome or path. One thing I have learned from life and history is that once the fighting begins plans, motives and desires change. The heavyweights can lose and the victor does not always get the spoils. Warfare is never static and when you hold still, even for an instant, is probably when you will get shot.
The next war has already begun. It will be asymmetrical (very overused phrase but in this case accurate) and it will be multi-layered. The cyber/financial moves have begun and are laying the groundwork for actual killing. Our vaunted DOD networks have been attacked repeatedly with varying degrees of success for nearly a decade. Mostly, we believe, by Chinese but also by Russian hackers. These are not guys sitting in their underwear in their bedrooms.
These are State-sponsored centers with thousands of experts using the best their nations can offer to penetrate our networks. On the civil side they have hacked power plants, water purification systems, electrical grid computers, etc. all over the country. They have raided the largest banking systems on the planet and gained vast amounts of personal data, financial dealings and confidential records. This is a side of warfare only discussed 20 years ago and now it is a reality for us all.
Financially, the single largest area open to attack is the petro-dollar. That is the U.S. hegemony in world trade currency and keeps the financial power centered here. This enables us, simply put: to maintain our life style, control relative inflation and dominate all other nations with our money. No major trade deals could be made without first changing other currency into dollars.
The status of owning the world’s reserve currency is an advantage we have enjoyed since the end of WWII. However, when Nixon divorced the dollar from its ties to gold, things starting going south and have only gained momentum since. I won’t detail the pitfalls and downturns here; but suffice it to say, other nations are now trading everything, including oil, in their own currencies or gold. This is crushing our financial network. It is forcing nations to re-evaluation of the dollar on a world wide basis.
How weak this has made us is debatable, but its effects are there for all to see; and it’s getting worse. Those are the first “shots fired” of the war with the U.S. These changes are forcing Barry to be more aggressive; something he is not good at nor enjoys. His short-sighted, immature reactions is what I believe will push us into physical conflict. Now let’s touch on more tangible ones.
The nation-states that I view as the most likely antagonists are China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, with possibly secondary support coming from countries like Cuba, Marxist regimes in South America, Africa and possibly Vietnam. It is widely known several of these nations have mutual defense agreements in place with the U.S. as their focal point.
Non-nation state aligned but still dangerous to us and our allies are ISIS, AQ, Hezbollah and all of the subset radical Muslim groups. None of them are limited by international boundaries and are difficult to force into a set piece confrontation (ring a bell with Vietnam vets?). My thoughts here are not all will enter into the foray; but most will play a part one way or another.
The secondary piece of this is how the radicals will deal with nation-states that pay them little heed once the fighting is joined. They are not to be trusted, which could confuse things further than they already are.
On the U.S. side stands Great Britain, Australia, Japan and possibly Israel, South Korea, the rest of NATO and the Philippines. After Japan, this list gets sketchy because we just don’t know who will actively participate or stay home and cover up to avoid getting hit. You could also throw in Pakistan but they are an odd entity that can go any direction.
Let’s not forget many of the above named nations on both sides are nuclear, whether declared or not. Most have ICBM capability or at least sub-orbital launch abilities. All can deliver bombs via aircraft. However, only the U.S., Russia and possibly China have a strategic bomber fleet. There are several, on both sides, that have nuclear or super-quiet diesel subs that can launch a variety of surface ship killing or land attack hardware.
Another fly in the pudding is the chem/bio option. Most major nations have a program, again, whether they admit to it or not. We have confirmed that ISIS is in control of at least some of Syria’s former stockpile and have drawn up plans for its “distribution”.
This could take us into another area of destruction so vile that the elites may get their wish: to kill all but 500 million of the worlds population. Certainly, Bill Ayers would get his 20-25 million dead in the U.S., just maybe not all the ones he would like to see killed. The point here is chem/bio is the poor man’s nuclear weapons. Don’t discount their threat or use in WWIII.
In Part II of this saga, I will outline strengths and weaknesses of both sides and some potential hot spots that may send this into a shooting war. And, for those who really get off on that stuff, possible outcomes.
Stand by.
A View From A Professional: War And Then Some – Part II, Plus Some Q&A
Posted on September 8, 2014 | 2 Comments
TELEVISION PROGRAMME....THE WORLD AT WAR... Picture Shows:OPENIN
Part I here.
Part II:
This is just an opinion and food for thought. As we stated earlier in Part I…
“We’ll both be anonymous so put your dicks away guys… he’s just giving an opinion and we’re not trying to sell anything, build a following of readers or a monument to ourselves.”
“So read this and think about it. It’s a strong possibility and I think you should all keep it in the back of your mind as possible outcomes.”
“This is only his opinion… however I believe a very well calculated and informed one…”
Subject: War and then some (Part II)
There are many people out there with great insights on just where it may ignite. And, some may be correct, either by guess or by skill. What I have discovered is that without the top secret briefs, I can still get pretty close to things. So, the following is my hat upon the wind.
The top two fire storms that will burn us are Ukraine and Syria. There are sub-areas that could ignite and at least one in the Pacific that may occur, unlooked for by most, but eastern Europe and Syria are the best bets.
Let’s look at them in a bit more detail:
Ukraine: I won’t delve into the internal strife/politics of the country. Fascists vs commies just doesn’t get me excited. However, this week the European and American NATO countries are meeting and that will be the number one topic discussed. Of the euro-trash, only Germany matters.
They are the de facto leaders, the bankers, the senior nation that still has control of its destiny. The rest have sold their souls to debt and socialism and will follow the German lead.
Barry has been humiliated time and again by Putin. He has come out second best in discussions, confrontations and in strategy. To seemingly counter this frustration, fighters have been moved forward from U.S. bases and from Great Britain. Armor elements have been reassigned for a six month window from the U.S. to eastern Europe for “exercises”. Stored tanks and Bradleys have been pulled out are being serviced.
This is at a time when the military has been cut by over a trillion dollars over the next decade. This is at a time when the Army is the smallest it’s been since post WWII. This is at a time when the U.S. is falling behind in fighter development, repair parts, closing forward air bases and pissing away intelligence assets.
But Barry’s ego is on the line and he wants this – he needs this.
Syria: The revolt against Assad has been on-going for 18 months. The Syrian leader has stayed in power and survived (if you can call hiding survival for a national leader) due to Russian support – mainly logistics of all classes of supply and intelligence.
This is where it gets interesting. Barry is getting shoved by advisers to be more aggressive with ISIS. His comment recently about not having a plan to deal with them is only partially true. The military has been spun up for months on targets with surprisingly good intel.
But Barry could not be bothered. He hates the military and U.S. power but after six years of disregard and contempt, he is realizing there are times and places it’s good to be the big kid on the block.
The fly in the pudding is Russia. They have pledged openly to defend Syria against all comers. They are in Assad’s corner. Interestingly, by bombing ISIS targets we are helping the side Barry wanted to oust, so Russia will watch closely but do nothing.
The rub will come if Barry commits troops to take on ISIS. Any excuse will do. We have had two beheadings in three weeks of American journalists. The hue and cry for war is building on all fronts at home.
If Barry commits troops Russia will likely back off but move full tilt into Ukraine, not to be outdone. I believe these are two white hot regions and we have not the leadership nor the strength morally to keep us off the spit.
In hardware, it is difficult to get good measures on nations as of late. China claims much in manpower (100 million man army) and a growing nuclear capability but only smiles when asked about chem/bio, submarine capabilities and growing air power.
We know they are or have developed a long range bomber but have not mastered mid-air refueling. They have somewhere between 8-15 nuclear subs and it’s classified how many are potential boomers vs attack subs. They have launched their first aircraft carrier but it is not ready for prime time.
It took us a generation to master air-ops; it will be the same for them. They are not strong enough to take us on face to face but combined with their new found ally, Russia, they could muster the courage to move on us.
Russian air power has increased noticeably in the last several years with at least two new fighters already being tested. Their navy has never recovered from the collapse but they have expanded their sub fleet in recent years.
Their boomers are now putting to sea fully armed. Their Backfire bombers are again pushing our Alaskan airspace and their vaunted armor capability has increased in number and type in the last five years.
They are deploying three new medium/long range missile systems in the near term. Putin has threatened us openly with nuclear strikes if we interfere in several areas, including the two I mentioned earlier.
Both Russia and China have anti-satellite capability and fully understand how much the U.S. depends on our eyes in the sky to manage the battle space. They have closely watched us fight two major campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
They know they cannot match our technology nor our war-fighting capabilities.
So what the hell?
You thought this was about WWIII?
It is.
Our enemies are not stupid and they have the patience of Job. They have attacked us, baited us, mocked us, showed us the middle finger, and dared us to move against them. They have been testing the people of this nation and its leadership.
They know they have a patsy in charge. They know the people are sick of war, but will still rally to a cause. They know we are broke and living on borrowed time. They know we are fully exposed to EMP attack, that we are blind without our satellites and our forces have never recovered materially or physically from 10 years of war.
They also know they cannot win against us and our few allies face to face in a short, hard war. Nope, can’t do it. So they want a protracted ground war. Even with WMDs, they have the manpower to defeat us.
They blind us, EMP the homeland, nuke several key but isolated bases that are crucial to our defense and we are hurt beyond recovery. They know we have no senior military leadership capable of fighting a global war. Barry has purged them from his grasp.
The question then presents itself: can we strike hard enough, fast enough and far enough to back them off?
No. They use EMPs and take our eyes out, our logistics train dries up, and we cannot make war, at least not for long.
Our 2000 aircraft in the Pacific can certainly be used in Europe, once we get them there. But I know first hand the number of parts our aircraft needed when they were flown from the States to the middle east in 1990. A bunch.
And we have a fraction of the logistical strength we had then. A Russian general stated once that logistics is an art form for the U.S. We have learned our lessons well in two world wars and several smaller conflicts. If you can’t power project through support, your fighters, tanks, and men are targets.
Our enemies know this. They have waited for someone to take us down internally so they could finish the job externally. They may not have this opportunity again. They have to take it.
They will get us involved overseas in a war we have no business in and they will strike us, hard. Our ten aircraft carrier groups are worth ten of their tactical nukes.
Over half are docked at any given time so targeting them is much easier. Our submarine force, still the largest in the world has lost thousands of trained men and lack the money to train the new ones effectively. We have lost the edge in naval forces and it’s getting worse every month.
For sure, we will hit back. Our few boomers that are loaded (unclassed info says some still are) will hit military targets, troop concentrations and shipyards. The enemy will pay a horrible price for their transgressions.
But they will be better off than we are.
They have backups. We do not.
They have shelters we do not, they have hardened equipment we do not. They have manufacturing we do not. And they have gold we do not (to purchase raw materials, bribe fence-sitters, etc).
I believe the war will end with our demise at some level. Maybe partially occupied (Alaska, Guam, Diego Garcia, etc) but certainly a shadow of our former selves. Our enemies will be taken aback by their losses but will still manage to come out ahead.
We have the hardware to win, even now. But I believe we lack the will and that will add much in the final counting.
Some Q&A:
My answers to questions I’ve been asked:
Several questions have come back at me from my two part war memo. Let me highlight the questions and answer them the best I can. The questions are paraphrased from the original for brevity.
Question: If Russia/China are our largest enemies how is ISIS going to play? And does Iran just sit this out?
I believe the Russo/Chicom alliance will be our prime antagonist; however, both nations are very adept at using puppets when needed. They will use ISIS, Iran and North Korea to full advantage up to and including the launching of WMD’s against our forward bases or the nation itself.
The advantage then will be the two big guys can deny knowledge and turn away or continue the attack on their terms, depending on the swiftness/lethality of our response. Either way, we will be heavily hit and weaker if forced to fight the first string.
Question: What will be happening to Israel during all of this? Will they just sit this one out and let us take the beating?
Barry has so alienated our number one ally in the middle east it is difficult to count on them beyond intelligence sharing. They will have to face down Iran, at least; possibly with Russian help. Israel is a nuclear power and no one wants them to go into their “destroy all attackers” mode with a massive launch.
Right now, they are number one in the middle east. They are also very easily destroyed due to their small physical size. I believe they will fight or at least be forced into it but bottom line: I do not see them surviving the assault.
The upside is: I don’t see Iran or southern Russian forces faring well either. That “take all, win all” attitude just may preclude a WMD type attack on Israel. They may just be surrounded and conquered by attrition. There simply is no good answer on that one.
Question: How long would it take to arm our subs and put them back to pre-Clinton era condition for our defense/offense?
Too long. As I briefly mentioned, in the last 20 years we have lost 100% of the crews that fought the Cold War against the Russian subs. The skills, knowledge and experience is gone. Some was passed on but since the early 90’s the U.S. has had no real submarine opponent.
Sure, the Chicoms have subs and we have played with them but they have not been a “blue water” threat until just recently. That means we have played ball against the home team and don’t have the experience against another, more aggressive group. It’s like always shooting bullseye targets then suddenly being dropped into a close-support fire fight. Lots of differences.
Question: What real support would you see coming out of Europe?
Very little. They would work with us on intelligence gathering and possibly some material support but I would not count on troops or fleets of either aircraft or ships.
Remember: Europe was torn apart by two major wars in less than 30 years. If they can sit this one out and work with the victors, they will. We are the prize and have been since 1945. If we don’t work at staying on top, someone will work to take us down and that is exactly what is happening.
Final note: I wrote this entire piece by request. It was not my first choice nor even something I had considered doing on my own. I have a number of friends that I send comments to occasionally about events and coming attractions.
I do not sell myself as a “know it all” on the world political stage, nor even about up to the minute military strategies. What I do know is that thousands of pages of research and hundreds of hours studying current events show an unmistakable direction for our nation.
At this point in time it cannot be reversed, and the outcomes I predict or that others may come up with will happen.
Time is not our ally – it is only a measurement of how long we have left.
Screen shot 2014-09-08 at 9.57.53 AM
Drudge headline, 1010EDT, 8 SEPT 14
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Tallinn (AFP) – Russia’s arrest of an Estonian policeman has sparked fears that Moscow is using the incident to test NATO’s resolve to defend its small Baltic allies as the crisis in eastern Ukraine rumbles on. Related Stories
Moscow detained officer Eston Kohver on Saturday in what Russia claims is a spying probe. Prosecutors say he was arrested in possession of a pistol, ammunition, 5,000 euros ($6,500) and “special equipment to carry out covert recordings”.
But Tallinn alleges Russia kidnapped Kohver from Estonia at gunpoint as he was investigating cross-border crime.
A source close to the probe in Moscow quoted on Monday by Russia’s Interfax news agency said Kohver had denied being a spy or smuggling a firearm into the country.
Many in Estonia believe the timing of Kohver’s arrest is deliberate, coming just two days after US President Barack Obama visited Tallinn to trumpet Baltic security following Russia’s role in the Ukraine crisis.
“The operation was obviously carefully planned and prepared,” Kaarel Kaas, an analyst with Estonia’s International Centre for Defence Studie, told AFP.
“The kidnapping on Estonian soil was a conscious choice to demonstrate that the FSB (Russian intelligence service) can operate in spite of all obstacles,” he said.
“It’s hard to tell if it was done to show NATO, Estonia or the KAPO (Estonian intelligence police) their place, but certainly it was a demonstration of power and deterrence.”
Eerik-Niiles Kross, a former Estonian intelligence chief and diplomat, told AFP Kohver’s arrest was unprecedented “during the entire post-Cold War era”.
“In my opinion, it is not only an extraordinary event in Estonia but also much wider in the relationship between Russia and NATO,” he added.
Obama reassured NATO’s Baltic allies last week that the alliance and the US would guarantee their independence and protection in any fight with Russia.
NATO itself also announced a new rapid reaction force aimed at countering any threat to its members at a key summit last week in Wales.
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania emerged from nearly five decades of Soviet occupation in the early 1990s and joined NATO and the European Union in 2004 in a bid to shore up their security amid tense relations with Moscow.
- ‘Outrageous’ -
According to President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, the “abduction occurred in the course of a cross-border corruption investigation on Estonian soil. Russia admitted this was the work of their special services.”
Russia’s FSB claims it detained Kohver in northwestern Russia close to the Estonian border as he attempted to carry out an “undercover operation”.
Moscow has so far failed to officially update Estonian authorities on the incident and diplomats has been unable to see Kohver, according to foreign minister Urmas Paet.
The incident has Estonian press and social media brimming with speculation.
“The kidnapping was aimed at undermining Estonia’s sense of security,” Postimees, the country’s leading broadsheet daily, said in a Monday editorial.
It also claimed Kohver may have discovered Russian security officials’ involvement in smuggling before he was detained.
“The question remains how did FSB operatives know about his presence at a given point and a given moment,” Postimees said.
Arnold Sinisalu, head of the KAPO anti-corruption investigation unit, confirmed Kohver was “collecting information about cross border customs corruption in the widest sense”.
For Estonians who still remember Soviet times, the incident conjured up bad memories of an era they hoped was consigned to history.
“The most disgusting thing with this kidnapping is the similarity to the actions of the inhumane dictatorship during the Soviet Union,” Tallinn-based travel agent Juta Aavik, 40, told AFP.
“If they (Russia) want to, they arrest a person, fabricate whatever accusation, break all the rules and no one even coughs. Now it’s a citizen of an independent country outside Russian territory. It’s outrageous.”
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Politics of Denial: Moscow denies aircraft ‘approached’ Canadian warship
.
Moscow (AFP) – The Russian defence ministry said on Tuesday that its planes had not approached a Canadian frigate on a NATO mission in the Black Sea in an incident Ottawa denounced as “unnecessarily provocative”.
Moscow said an Sukhoi Su-24 attack aircraft and an Antonov An-26 transport plane were carrying out “planned flights over neutral waters of the Black Sea near the Russian Federation’s state border”.
“The flightpath of the planes of the Russian airforce ran through an area where the HMCS Toronto was located, without approaching the foreign military vessel,” Major General Konashenkov told Russian news agencies.
HMCS Toronto
Canadian Defense Minister Rob Nicholson said on Monday that a Russian military plane had circled over the HMCS Toronto, a Canadian frigate in the Black Sea, where NATO and Ukraine are holding naval exercises.
The Russian aircraft “did not in any way pose a threat to the Canadian ship”, Nicholson said but added that “their actions were unnecessarily provocative and risk escalating tensions even further” in the region.
The HMCS Toronto left Canada’s Atlantic coast at the end of July with 250 sailors and Sea King helicopters on board to join the NATO mission.
Sukhoi Su-24 attack aircraft
Russia and the West are locked in a dramatic standoff over a crisis in Ukraine where Kremlin-backed separatists are battling against pro-Western Kiev authorities.
Ukraine said on Monday it had launched three-day naval exercises with US-led NATO forces in the Black Sea aimed at guaranteeing its security.
Related: Russian Strategic Bombers Near Canada Practice Cruise Missile Strikes on US
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Posted on September 9, 2014 by chainsoff
The Arab Spring has proven to be nothing more than an effort to empower Islamic radicalism, not just throughout the Middle East, but in USA as well.
Let’s review.
Egypt was under control of a brutal dictator, Sadat. As we said all of those Muslim states are ruled by dictators. However, Sadat was our ally. He kept the Muslim Brotherhood in check by brutal but necessary means. But Obama, working to strengthen Islamic fundamentalism, used the might and financial power of America to depose him. He then funded and supported the Muslim Brotherhood in its effort to take control of Egypt. (Thankfully, the Egyptian military has since remedied that.)
Libya, was at one time a threat and under Khadaffy it had been responsible for some very bloody attacks on the West. But for the last couple of decades, after Ronald Reagan sent him a clear message, Khadaffy stopped his nuclear weapons program and prevented any further attacks on the West and kept terrorism, albeit mercilessly, under control. But Obama used our air force to obliterate his government and his military and much to the delight of Hilary Clinton and at the hands of Islamic Terrorists, Khadaffy was tortured and slaughtered on the streets of Tripoli. Post Khadaffy, Muslim terrorist factions have formed and are responsible for the deaths of Americans in Benghazi. That entire country is now in chaos. Jetliners are in the hands of fanatics, weapons Obama gave to them are being used to slaughter people by the thousands.
Syria has been able to keep the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic terrorists in check for generations. Assad, like his father before him, understands the only thing terrorist know is violence and the only thing that has kept them under control is cold and unrelenting prosecution and yes, persecution. But Obama has supported Assad’s enemies with funding and weapons. His enemies by the way are affiliated with and are the same terrorists who have mass murdered Iraqi soldiers, Iraqi Christians and anyone who has stood in the way of total domination ofSharia Law.
And now Iraq. At the cost of billions of dollars, the lives and limbs of thousands of America boys, Iraq had a chance to become a stable force in the region. Roadside bombings, insurgencies and terrorist activity had been almost completely shut down. But Obama announced he was pulling out and leaving then deserted the Iraqi people and their new and fledgling government. ISIS/ISSL or whatever the murdering scum are calling themselves this week have been allowed to crap all over any prospect of a stable Iraq. Thank you Obama.
Iraq, Syria, Libya and the entire Middle East are in a gruesome blood lust as terrorists who were and continue to be supported, supplied and encouraged by Obama are growing in strength and savagery, minute by minute, day by day.
One needs to stop here and reflect. Does this appear to be incompetence or desire? Can this in any way be the result of “dissociation” or lack of attention? Or does it seem to be intentional, a part of a plan, a long term plan?
Now suppose this New World Oder, knowing how weak and politically correct American politicians and the so called leaders are, saw Islamic fundamentalism as a tool which could be fomented, funded and supported in order for it to do the dirty work of destroying America and Capitalism. Setting it in motion and then sitting back and watching the mayhem as America implodes and then after all Western and Judeo/Christian values have been vanquished, a few well placed nuclear weapons would successfully retire that “tool”.
Returning now back to America. What, if anything can we do? Our election process has been corrupted, the news media continues to be in state of denial to what is happening.
The following information has been checked and verified.
Since 9-11 the immigration of Muslims into America in the first ten years following that day, has increased by 73% as compared to the ten years prior to that attack.
Also in that same time frame one would suspect that Islamic Mosques would be closely watched and their numbers controlled. Again, you would be wrong. Very wrong. In the time since 3,000 Americans were burned to death, jumped to their deaths or buried under thousands of tons of rubble, the number of Mosques in this country has, excuse the verb, exploded. There are 85% more Islamic Mosques in America now than on 9-11. There are Mosques in every state and every territory, including Alaska and Puerto Rico.
Before we get into the actual numbers and what significance can be placed on them it is understandable that some reading this may be thinking Mosques are just churches used for prayer and honoring Allah. Why would anyone be concerned about the growth in the number of houses of worship?
Here is why you should worry. Islamic radicals dominate not only the Muslim population but use the houses of worship for many other things beside bowing towards Mecca. Many are military compounds, gated and guarded. No non Muslim, including the police or emergency services are allowed within these compounds. There is training, indoctrination and preparation for Jihad taking place in a large percentage of these institutions.
Don’t believe that? Here then are the words of the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan, taken from a speech he gave years ago.
Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.
As of this writing the number of “Islamic barracks” in the United States has reached almost 3 thousand. At any moment in time, for the past 6 years, there are over 30 Mosques under construction. Once they get their CO, no infidel will ever be allowed to enter. What goes on behind the Mosque walls, truly stays there. At least until the trap door of the Trojan Horse is sprung open.
Granted, it is not likely that every single Mosque is under the control of Jihadists. But even if just 10% are and are being used for training and launching of terrorists, we the infidel, are in very serious jeopardy. For certain, it’s more likely that only 10% are not engaged in your future destruction.
If the most talented and experienced generals of the world were given the task of establishing a foothold in an enemy territory in preparation for a full scale attack, there is no way they could be better prepared, dispersed and trained as are these future murderers of American citizens.
Under the cover of freedom of religion and privacy the campaign to institute Sharia Law in the land of the unbelievers is well underway and perhaps long past the time it can be reversed.
Here are some startling examples of the Muslim installations for particular areas of the country. As our research has indicated they are everywhere. In every state and in some states, in every county.
For example:
In the north east alone, in just New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Maryland there are over 526 Mosques (training compounds?) that could be used to launch Jihad.
Texas and California is home to over 600 Mosques.
In Florida, Georgia and Virginia there are another 300.
The balance of the 3,000 are dispersed throughout the states with large concentrations near big cities in states like Illinois, Tennessee and the Carolinas.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It’s just not right for the President of the United States to be a lap dog for any foreign entity and even more so if that favored group is a terrorist inclined quasi religious gathering of foreigners who are anti-American at heart. This current occupant of our Oval Office fits that description totally.
Obama has for the second year in row used his executive powers to put a cap on pay raises for our loyal armed forces and is repeating the mistakes of past administrations that were intent on degrading and insulting to our military by not allowing legitimate pay increases.
According to a letter from the Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) dated September 5, 2014 an “active duty pay raise is determined by private sector wage growth, measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employment Cost Index (ECI). The ECI calls for a 1.8 percent pay raise in 2015.”
According to the MOAA letter, “From 2000 to 2012, Congress worked hard to eliminate a 13.5 percent military pay gap with the private sector caused by repeatedly capping military raises in the 1980s and ‘90s.
“But the restoration of military pay comparability with the private sector is under threat. Pay has been capped for two years, and the administration’s FY 2015 budget proposes to continue caps for a total of six years.”
Americans who support their military forces need to get their wishes in this matter made known to the socialist liberal Democrats in the U. S. Senate and ask those communistic thinking, very highly OVERPAID blue-bloods to get back down to earth and compensate our armed force protectors fairly.
MOAA also stated that “Earlier this year, the (Republican controlled) House (of Representatives) rejected the (Obama) administration’s pay (cut) cap and authorized a 1.8 percent raise in its version of the FY 2015 defense authorization bill and appropriated funding to pay for it. The (Democrat controlled) Senate Armed Services Committee supported the administration’s 1.0 percent cap.”
MOAA continued, “To reverse the President’s decision to cap pay in 2015, Congress would need to override the President’s authority to alter the pay raise from the ECI.”
That is to say that both houses of Congress would have to override the President’s authority and with the liberal majority in the hands of the Democrats that is about as likely to happen as a huge pay INCREASE for our troops.
“MOAA President Vice Adm. Norb Ryan, USN (Ret) responded to the President’s announcement, saying “Pay raises for the military, just like those of average Americans, are important for retention. It’s a fundamental principle of sustaining the all-volunteer force. History has shown that once Congress starts accepting proposals to cap military pay below private sector growth, those caps continue until retention and readiness are compromised.”
Those capping of what used to be called cost of living adjustments makes me wonder it there is EVER any attempts by Congress to cap any such raises in congressional salaries. It would be a cold day in Al Gore’s climatological environs for such a happening to occur.
And what if our loyal and obedient military forces responded to those cuts in their living costs compensation by cutting back proportionately to the pay cuts on their feasance to our country? You know, no outright refusal to do normal chores but a vague removal of effort and activity other than the usual standard procedure? Our men and women in uniform probably have an abundance of scruples that would prevent them from those slighter actions. But the attitude of ‘if they can do it to us, we can let them know in subtle ways that we object’ might persist.
Then again, scrooges among the socialist-communist liberal Democrats in their midst just also might provide some slothfulness as a form of payback. But in reality, these destructive reactions to pay increase actions are probably just what Obama would hope for; a rebellious action that would further his goals of destroying our entire government.
Now if this discussion on our usurper president was about the possibility of cutting or reducing his salary as a do-nothing-vacation-president, I think a lot of people might have perked up and rallied around that proposition. God knows he doesn’t deserve the high levels of pay, perks, and expenses for the inertia that he brings to his office. And the high costs he encounters when on vacations to fancy resorts and passes on to the taxpayers are definitely counter productive.
His recent appearance on public television wearing a Filene’s Basement Store, baggy and un-regal tan suit for a press conference may have had some fashion conscious bloggers thinking that his salary had already been reduced for his inactions (ironically they also involve our military.)
But apparently this faux pas was just another error in judgment.
Two Russian strategic bombers conducted practice cruise missile attacks on the United States during a training mission last week that defense officials say appeared timed to the NATO summit in Wales.
The Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers were tracked flying a route across the northern Atlantic near Iceland, Greenland, and Canada’s northeast.
Analysis of the flight indicated the aircraft were conducting practice runs to a pre-determined “launch box”—an optimum point for firing nuclear-armed cruise missiles at U.S. targets, said defense officials familiar with intelligence reports.
It’s bad enough that Russia is “saber-rattling” (more likely flashing not so polite sign language our way), but to add insult to injury, they’re not even being sneaky about buzzing U.S. airspace. Our frenemy Vladimir Putin is sending Tu-95 Bears, a Korean War era turbo prop airplane so loud that submarines can hear them underwater. In American slang, that’s called “in your face” to the “leadership” in the drained swamp we call a nation’s capitol.
The prevailing theory at the Free Beacon piece quoted above is that Vladmir Putin and his band of merry KGB retirees strategically timed these rehearsals to coincide with NATO meetings. It seems that there is a Cold War hangover mentality still hovering in Moscow driving these practice drills:
Disclosure of the nuclear bombing practice comes as a Russian general last week called for Moscow to change its doctrine to include preemptive nuclear strikes on the United States and NATO.
Gen. Yuri Yakubov, a senior Defense Ministry official, was quoted by the state-run Interfax news agency as saying that Russia’s 2010 military doctrine should be revised to identify the United States and the NATO alliance as enemies, and clearly outline the conditions for a preemptive nuclear strike against them.
Here we go again. There is a very definite possibility of being dragged into yet another conflict we did not exactly provoke and squaring off with an enemy determined to kill us all if they have to.
We’ve done this before. From 1946-ish until 1989. For over forty years, the United States and Russia, I mean the Union of Soviet and Socialist Republics (socialist republic is an oxymoron if there ever was one), squared off in a war that had no formal battles, but plenty of proxy conflicts and casualties and cost us a lot of money. When the Soviets parked nuclear cruise missiles off the coast of Florida in the 60’s, rather than firing them and finishing us off at the time, they blinked. Does all this mean they are itching for a do-over?
Not that there is much chance of being able to strike against the entire country from the Labrador Sea, but considerable damage could be done from there:
The Tu-95 is a nuclear-capable bomber that is outfitted with six AS-15 nuclear-armed cruise missiles. The missiles have a range of over 1,800 miles.
Google Earth analysis reveals that a Tu-95 launch box located in the Labrador Sea and firing AS-15 missiles would be in range of Ottawa, New York, Washington, and Chicago, and could reach as far south as the Norfolk Naval base.
There’s a lot more that could be targeted on the east coast, but any of those targets alone being in the cross-hairs is a cause for sleep loss.
What makes this more hair raising is that this bullying behavior started seven years ago:
Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon strategic policymaker and currently senior analyst at the National Institute for Public Policy, said Russian leaders frequently issue public nuclear threats because they regard their nuclear arsenal as the main element of their great power status.
“Putin began what he called bomber ‘combat patrols’ in 2007 and they continue,” Schneider said. “They are designed to intimidate as well as practice nuclear bomber attacks.”…
He said the threats have included nuclear exercises, bomber flights, and public statements, including Putin’s suggestion that NATO ‘not mess with us’ because Moscow remains a nuclear power.
Northern Command has confirmed that Russian strategic bomber flights increased sharply over the past six months….
Last month, at least 16 bomber incursions by the Russians took place within the northwestern U.S. and Canadian air defense zones over a period 10 days. It was the largest number of incursions since the end of the Cold War. U.S. fighter jets intercepted the Russian aircraft and followed them until they excited the defense zone.
In June, Russian bombers flew over the arctic prompting intercepts by Canadian fighters on two occasions. The Canadian government called the stepped up bomber flights a “strategic message” from Moscow amid heightened tensions.
And on June 20, the Russian Defense Ministry announced the test launch of six AS-15 missiles from a Bear bomber during military exercises.
That same month, on June 9, two Russian Bear bombers flew within 50 miles of the California coast in the closest strategic bomber flights near a U.S. coast since the Cold War with the Soviet Union.
This latest incident is all about NATO and reminding the rest of the world that Russia is still a nuclear power? That’s quite a laundry list of fly-bys for a simple saber-rattling episode.
And what is the United States doing to counter these threatening moves? Barack Obama pledged a military presence in the Baltic countries last week and pledged the protection of NATO to Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, all of which split from the old Soviet Union as fast as they could when the opportunity arose. Some sources claim that the three teeny tiny nations are American puppet countries and this is no more than an offensive defense move. Could be. No military action in Ukraine, though, so the sincerity of the Obama Regime is definitely in question. No indication if we are buzzing the Polijarny Inlet where the famed Russian Navy Northern Fleet base lies, either.
Ask people in the military about the end of the Cold War and you will hear that it didn’t really end, it was just put on the back burner. After twenty-five years, it looks to be heating up again. At the height of Cold War I, cooler heads prevailed rather than trying to annihilate the enemy. Let’s hope this version of the USSR/Russia displays that sort of patience. Really, though, sixty year old bombers? Does Putin think that little of us?
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Obama commits US to war against Russia in defense of Baltic states
8 September 2014
In a series of speeches and press conferences in connection with last week’s NATO summit in Wales, President Barack Obama publicly declared that the United States military will maintain a permanent presence in the Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, which border Russia. He vowed that US air and ground forces will remain poised forevermore to respond to claims of Russian aggression by the governments of these countries by attacking Moscow.
In appearances in the Estonian capital of Tallinn and later in Wales, Obama announced a series of military moves against Russia by the United States and NATO as well as expanded economic sanctions and pledges to bolster the military forces of the former Soviet republics of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. He made clear in addition that Washington will push for all three countries to join the US-dominated NATO military alliance.
These statements represent an immense escalation of US and NATO military threats against Russia. Without any public discussion, and entirely over the heads of the American people, the Obama administration has committed the country to go to war with the second largest nuclear power in the world over three small countries in Eastern Europe.
At a joint press conference September 3 with Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Obama declared, “So I’ve come here, first and foremost, to reaffirm the commitment of the United States to the security of Estonia. As NATO allies, we have Article 5 duties to our collective defense. That is a commitment that is unbreakable. It is unwavering. It is eternal.”
In a speech later that day “to the people of Estonia,” Obama was, if anything, even more explicit about the commitment of US military forces in the Baltic states and their readiness to attack Russia. “Today, more NATO aircraft patrol the skies of the Baltics,” he said. “More American forces are on the ground training and rotating through each of the Baltic states. More NATO ships patrol the Black Sea… I believe our Alliance should extend these defensive measures for as long as necessary…
“Article 5 is crystal clear. An attack on one is an attack on all. So if, in such a moment, you ever ask again, ‘who will come to help,’ you’ll know the answer—the NATO Alliance, including the Armed Forces of the United States of America, ‘right here, present, now!’ We’ll be here for Estonia. We will be here for Latvia. We will be here for Lithuania…
“Here in the Baltics… it would mean more US forces—including American boots on the ground continuously rotating through Estonia and Latvia and Lithuania.” [Emphasis added]
He went on to declare, “We need to enhance NATO’s Rapid Response Force so it can deploy even more quickly and not just react to threats, but also deter them .” [Emphasis added]. This last statement clearly implies the right of the US and NATO to militarily respond not only to actions, but also “preventively” to supposed threats.
At a press conference two days later, following the NATO summit, Obama reiterated the same belligerent line.
With the commitments announced last week, the US government is tying the fate of the American people and, indeed, the people of the world, to the actions of governments of three small countries whose combined population is 6.6 million. All three governments are rightwing, ultranationalist and rabidly anti-Russian. They represent a criminal layer of oligarchs who made their fortunes by plundering state property after secession from the Soviet Union and the launching of capitalist restoration.
All these governments are also led by individuals with close ties to American intelligence and the Pentagon. They are all imposing austerity programs that are impoverishing the working class, removing all social protections, and opening up their respective economies to unfettered profit making by Western capital.
The President of Estonia, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, with whom Obama shared the stage in the Estonian capital, was raised and educated in the United States. From 1984 until 1993 he worked for US-operated Radio Free Europe, heading its Estonian desk.
Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė, often referred to as the Iron Lady and the Steel Magnolia, went to study in the Special Program for senior executives at Georgetown University in Washington DC soon after Lithuania broke away from the Soviet Union. In the 1990s she served as minister plenipotentiary at the Lithuanian embassy in Washington.
The prime minister of Latvia, Laimdota Straujuma, is a member of the rightwing Unity Party.
All three are US puppet governments. They are highly unstable and riven by internal conflicts. They preside over populations that are seething with anger over the destruction of working-class living standards and the corruption of the ruling oligarchies. They have been among the most belligerent advocates of aggressive action against Russia. Any one of them could, for domestic political reasons, incite or fabricate a military clash with Russia.
Washington is manufacturing a nonexistent threat to the Baltic states from Russia. More than 20 years ago, during the process of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, these countries became independent, with the approval of Moscow. The claim that they now face an imminent threat from Russia is a pretext for violating previous agreements with Moscow not to expand NATO or station NATO military forces on former Soviet territory.
From a geostrategic standpoint, the fate of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia has virtually no significance for the United States. But for Russia, the positioning of US and NATO ground and air forces and military hardware just miles from its border is an existential threat.
How would Washington react if Russia announced that it was stationing troops in Mexico, Central America or the Caribbean? Fifty-two years ago, in the Cuban missile crisis, the Kennedy administration declared that Moscow’s installation of missiles in Cuba constituted an intolerable threat to US national security. Kennedy threatened nuclear war unless Khrushchev removed them.
The Russian government and military can draw no conclusion from the current crisis other than the belief that Washington is preparing to attack Moscow. Russian officials have announced that in response to the NATO summit, Moscow is revamping its military doctrine.
In the 1950s and 1960s, at the height of the Cold War, the term “brinksmanship” was used to denote willful recklessness in foreign policy. What the Obama administration is doing today goes far beyond anything carried out by a US administration in that period.
Then, the concern was frequently raised that a heightened level of mistrust and tension between Washington and Moscow could result in a relatively minor incident escalating out of control and precipitating a nuclear war. For that reason, the so-called “hot line” was set up between the two capitals to prevent either side from misinterpreting the aims of the other.
Today, the moves by the Obama administration and its NATO allies seem designed to generate in Russia the greatest possible level of apprehension and goad it into responding militarily. Its population is still haunted by the massive loss of life, which followed the surprise attack by Nazi Germany on the Soviet Union in June 1941. In the course of the next four years 27 million Soviet citizens lost their lives.
All of the stated reasons for US-NATO warmongering against Russia are lies. The aggressors in the Ukraine crisis from the outset have been Washington and Berlin. They orchestrated a coup led by neo-fascist forces that overthrew the elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych last February, following Yanukovych’s decision not to enter into an Association Agreement with the European Union or accept an austerity program dictated by the International Monetary Fund.
They have since used the crisis in Ukraine to pursue a policy of isolating and weakening Russia. It is clear that the purpose of the military, political and economic moves against Russia is to compel it to submit to the dictates of US and German imperialism.
Unless the war provocations of US and European imperialism are stopped by the intervention of the international working class, it is only a matter of time before an incident involving NATO and Russian forces triggers a crisis that could escalate into a full-blown nuclear war.
Barry Grey
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The bombers are a diversion while the nuclear subs do the true dirty work.
Russian Bombers Buzz North American Coast: Cold War Redux Or Is Putin Just In A Snit?
Idiots. How old are our B-52s? Equally as old. One B-52 in our fleet has been flown by threegenerations of the same family! But the Russians, like us, have updated the avionics and what not.
A bomb (or cruise missile) truck does not need to be the latest whiz-bang. It just needs to be good enough to survive to get to its destination, deliver its payload, and if the crew is lucky, survive the return trip.
Idiots. How old are our B-52s? Equally as old. One B-52 in our fleet has been flown by threegenerations of the same family! But the Russians, like us, have updated the avionics and what not.
A bomb (or cruise missile) truck does not need to be the latest whiz-bang. It just needs to be good enough to survive to get to its destination, deliver its payload, and if the crew is lucky, survive the return trip.
Well...it's the "technology bigot" in them.
Look around. Apple is coming out with a new gadget today.
In "my day" I had an Apple ][, then a ][+. I "upgraded the ][+" to a //e (replaced mother board, and "hacked" the case to fit the different keyboard).
Today people switch phones as quickly as their underwear (sometimes, in some peoples' cases, more often).
We have this perception that if something is "old" (more than 2-3 years old) it's obsolete. I believe you're the PROUD owner of a Yaesu FT-101B which contains (GASP!) vacuum tubes. (and transistors).
That rig worked great. I loved it, hated parting with it, but it went to a good home I think.
B52s have changed vastly over time as well:
People don't understand you can continuously upgrade military hardware.
I work on a system created in 1984. My system is now on a baseline that numbers in the high 20s - and is replaced roughly every 3 years. The original shell for the remote access panel (the thing the customer sees) is a 1960ish looking, Star Trek like thing. So everyone sees THAT and says "When are we going to join the 21st Century! Where's our prox reader, our touch screen display and why do I even have to use this ancient shit?"
Here's the OLD stuff:
(We still use the item on the left).
Here's an older console... we still use this, though monitors are updated now:
I don't have a released image of the RAP-II, but it has a touch screen display, can read swipes and CAC cards. Can do finger print instead of hand geometry like the unit on the right in the first picture.
Thing is, they are expensive. I've got hundreds of those things to maintain and that means changing all of them would be, likely, in the millions of dollars. SOME of us try to save some money in the government.
Anyway, the point is people are bigots when it comes to having the best and most newest.....
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
MOSCOW, September 8 (RIA Novosti) – Modular blocks used for the construction of Russia's military base in the Arctic have been delivered to Wrangel Island and Cape Schmidt, Colonel Alexander Gordeyev, head of the Eastern Military District’s press service, said Monday.
“The modular blocks for the construction of military stations have been delivered to Wrangel Island and to Cape Schmidt. The complex will be assembled in the form of a star that allows the personnel to move freely inside the construction, limiting exposure to cold temperatures as much as possible,” Gordeyev told journalists.
Two 34-modular administrative-residential complexes will be assembled within a month to support the activities of the Eastern Military District’s Arctic group.
The complex consists of residential, utility and administrative units. It has a gym, a sauna and a psychological relaxation room.
Russia intends to strengthen its position in the Arctic on all fronts: military, political, financial and economic. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the creation of a new public authority to implement Russian Federation policy in the Arctic.
By the end of 2014, Russia plans to expand its military deployments in the Arctic and by October, 2015 the air defense reconstruction in the Arctic islands should be completed.
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."
Re: World War Three Thread....
Reply With Quote
.
Originally Posted by American Patriot
Russian Defense Ministry to Deliver Equipment, Weapons to Troops in Arctic by End of Month
Bookmarks