Pentagon prepares for possible war with Russia

PanARMENIAN ^ | 08.02.2007

[Thunder90]

The Russians have made incredible advances in their military weaponry since the beginning of the decade.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

An even bigger threat to our security is the Democrat Party.

[Paul Ross]

And I bet China would be unwilling to sacrifice cargo space in container ships

You would lose your bet.

[Thunder90]

Russia has a few mothballed air craft carriers that they are refurbishing and going to be putting on the high seas by the middle of 2008.

[GSlob]

So? Robert Gates is merely earning his pay. Friendly countries are not included in his list of potential adversaries, and unfriendly countries are. Makes perfect sense.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Um, no. More like sounding like they've always been prepared should the Russians go back to their old ways. If there's a war with either of these two it will be a proxy one fought against Iran and North Korea.

[RobRoy]

SOP.

This isn't news. It is what they do.

[Paul Ross]

An even bigger threat to our security is the Democrat Party.

A'hem. Merely the local arm of the KGB/FSB.

[middie]

See remark about "...show-off" weapons. They can develop excellent hardware, that's true. Weapons alone do not win wars. They are won: (1) through a articulated foreign policy intended to cause the country's will to be complied with and the losing government either to comply or be subjugated; (2) Weapons, absent a logistics chain, with personnel and the entire minutia of support are useless irrespective of their potential combat power if properly supported; (3) Every nation-state at war needs a civilian populace dedicated to economic support through taxation, sacrifice and manufacturing (this is a component of winning force projection that someone neglected to tell GWB); (4) air and sea dominance, means of transport free of interdiction and energetic public support of policy; and (5) the national wealth to sustain the effort.

The new Russia has none of the above notwithstanding their skill are weapons creation.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Perhaps we should be campaigning to be Block Commissar in our neighborhood and be one of the In Crowd.

:-)

[M. Espinola]

"Gog and Magog? I thought that would be us and the Mussies!"

Russia is arming the Muzzies and left over communist controlled dictatorships with more then enough weapons to trigger WWIII. Some threats do not seem to ever change.

[RusIvan]

The Russsian are not coming, the Russians are not coming --Go tell Alan Arkin. ==

Amen:).

[ko_kyi]

"Russia's GNP
is so small they probably
couldn't afford fuel

to fly enough planes
for a proper invasion.
And I bet China

would be unwilling
to sacrifice cargo space
in container ships

for the Reds to use
snail-mail to send soldiers here . . .
No, I think we're safe."

Burma-Shave

[Paul Ross]

The new Russia has none of the above notwithstanding their skill are weapons creation.

But they can always sell those weapons. Willing sellers to willing buyers. Such as China. As I am sure you appreciate, the same weaknesses pertaining to Russia cannot be said to apply to China. In particular:

(3) Every nation-state at war needs a civilian populace dedicated to economic support through taxation, sacrifice and manufacturing (this is a component of winning force projection that someone neglected to tell GWB);

Correct. And it is where the Communist Party dictatorship in China is on a real winning streak. Not just adding to their manufacturing capabilities...but in a truly devastating "twofer"...taking away our own key capabilities when whole plants here are shut down, boxed up and shipped over to Tianjin for reassembly...and co-opting and muzzling the political dogs that should be barking...

and (4) air and sea dominance, means of transport free of interdiction and energetic public support of policy; and

As you probably know all too well, the President in the BRAC hearings attempted to cut down our destroyer production capabilities to just one shipyard, and our submarine production capabilities to just one shipyard...all while he really seems to have bought into the extremely liberal CBO's claims that we can get by with only a 200 ship Navy...with far fewer submarines, carriers, and essentially no ASW capability...perhaps the most critical component vital to any clash with China. He has continued Clinton's Naval holiday, and indeed forcibly retired many ships with over half their service life still available...we have gone from 344 ships which we had when he took over in '01 and are now down to 286. He has never been forced to account for his willfully anemic Naval budgets on the Hill...which has been balking him in part, at least it was until the democrats took over the House. It has been pointed out to the Sec. Def., that the current build-rate and retirement rates is pointing towards a "fleet" of only 185 ships and 28 submarines...in just twenty or so years.

The CBO had unusually rosy RAT assumptions about China's intentions. Which are now clearly confounded by their actual deployments and Hu Jintau's proclaimed intentions to have a sufficient Blue Water to prevail. Their build rate has them passing us by 2015. When this was pointed out to Sec. Defense Rumsfeld, he said, "we are watching that with concern." But apparently not enough, since the budget has not been seriously corrected, despite the urgent appeals of the Admirals.

Complicating the strategic situation, is the Naval Alliance decline. With the singular exception of Japan, our main naval allies, such as Britain are shrinking. The UK just announced it was going to cut its fleet in half, from 44 to 22.

(5) the national wealth to sustain the effort.

Another interesting phenomenon...with the redistribution programs that seem to appeal to President Bush. He seems to believe that transfers of our wealth to China are a good thing. This also appears to be a weakness of the President's understanding of our national security...and the real enmity that China has successfully sustained covertly...and channelled into their new generation which was supposed to be our hopes for reform of their system.

The President, despite the graphic lesson of 9/11 staring him in the face, really does not seem to have fully internalized the multiple messages thereto, and believes that raw GNP by itself is sufficient to guarantee our safety...at least among the "great powers." Creating entanglements.

That liberal ivory-tower assumption has been disproven countless times. And during this nation's own short history.

[middie]

I don't disagree with your detailed analysis. The problem I discern is that you jump from a scholarly analysis to a predisposed conclusion that is disparate from your analysis. You don't conclude where the evidence has taken you. China's low valued currency, their total disregard for environmental concerns and their purchase of our national debt occasioned by GWB's bowing to commercial interests whose short sighted, tunnel visioned lobbying has caused the virtual shut down of U.S. industry; those are the events to which future historians will attribute the demise of the USA as the intenational hegemon and pole star for the free world's nations and economies.

So, as Russia can profit as a source of other nations', potentially our enemies, the remedy is to continue to possess the means and will to interdict that source. Today, China is not a realistic threat. It cannot sustain any type of international conflict (which is probably the reason it has refrained from an adventure into Taiwan).But if we continue the current type of White House policy initiated by GWB as a political pay-back to his money sources, China will indeed become a realistic threat. Right now it has no motivation to undertake an aggressive and hostile foreign policy that seeks to conform our international conduct to its own will. If, or when, that changes we better be situated to protect out interests and project the power to do so independently. Eight more years of incompetency of the type we've endured since January 2001 and we'll be that much farther down the path to the Rumsfeldian, Cheney and Chertoff international weakness and susceptibility to another nation state's power.

[Wombat101]

Those are NOT "aircraft carriers"; they are anti-subamarine carriers, or to be a bit more tachnical, "through-deck cruisers". Their job is not projection of power (like a US carrier), it is local air superiority and anti-submarine warfare, and the small numbers of aircraft they carry and support are often barely sufficient for these tasks.

They are not much of a threat to the US Navy.

[Centurion2000]

I'm pretty sure Russia and China have been "prepared" and continue to "prepare" for an invasion of the United States

China, maybe. Russia? No way in hell.

They have never had plans to try and invade and occupy the USA. A country with 140 million just can;t do it against a country with 300 million.

[cva66snipe]

I think Russia will not only be selling weapons but soon {within the next decade} military force as well. Their buyers being the M.E. and OPEC nations. That would put the life back into the Russian Defense Programs and production facilities which are simply shuttered sitting idle. They did not make our mistake of selling off bases for a new strip mall or land development like they've become in the U.S.

The GOG/MAGOG scenario is real and will be in our future. The Iron Fist could take hold in Russia at any time. I don't believe Russia's freedom such as it is will live beyond a generation. It was for Biblical Prophecy actually that it happened. A brief window in time.

In less than 5 years with a substantial cash influx Russia could be out producing us in defense production. Theirs would be in house and would be difficult to stop unlike any other nation stopping ours by simply cutting off our imports. I also think ones like Chavez are China's puppets backed to set up major regional communist powers. Watch Cuba when it is finally determined that Fidel and Raul are dead. He will make his play for it if he actually hasn't already. That is one reason giving up PR would be a very major mistake as was closing Rosie Roads.

I agree with much of what you say on Bush. He hasn't as of yet seriously addressed the reality of our military decline.

[Tailgunner Joe]

We are not afraid of you, Russia. Don't make us hurt you.

[Paul Ross]

They have never had plans to try and invade and occupy the USA. A country with 140 million just can;t do it against a country with 300 million.

Better revisit that overly smug assumption:

Defense Minster Chi Haotian (Jonathan Utz/AFP/Getty Images)

War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century

Leading CCP official argues for exterminating U.S. population

By Chi Haotian, Aug 08, 2005

Some pertinent quotes therefrom directly counter your thesis:

We have to focus on two points to fortify our leadership position and improve our leadership capacity. The first is to promote the “Three Represents” theory [8], stressing that our Party is the pioneer of the Chinese race, in addition to being the pioneer of the proletariat. Many citizens say in private, “We never voted for you, the Communist Party, to represent us. How can you claim to be our representatives?”

There’s no need to worry about this issue. Comrade Mao Zedong said that if we could lead our allies to victory and make them benefit, they would support us. Therefore, as long as we can lead the Chinese people outside of China, resolving the lack of living space in China, the Chinese people will support us. At that time, we don’t have to worry about the labels of “totalitarianism” or “dictatorship.” Whether we can forever represent the Chinese people depends on whether we can succeed in leading the Chinese people out of China. The second point, whether we can lead the Chinese people out of China, is the most important determinant of the CCP’s leadership position.

........

To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land, because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even with rifles or machine guns. Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people migrate there.

Only by using special means to “clean up” America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not. What kind of special means is there available for us to “clean up” America? Conventional weapons such as fighters, canons, missiles and battleships won’t do; neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not as foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons, despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio weapons have been invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of “cleaning up” America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.

From a humanitarian perspective, we should issue a warning to the American people and persuade them to leave America and leave the land they have lived in to the Chinese people. Or at least they should leave half of the United States to be China’s colony, because America was first discovered by the Chinese. But would this work? If this strategy does not work, then there is only one choice left to us. That is, use decisive means to “clean up” America, and reserve America for our use in a moment. Our historical experience has proven that as long as we make it happen, nobody in the world can do anything about us. Furthermore, if the United States as the leader is gone, then other enemies have to surrender to us.

Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die.