This General has a lot in common with Democrats!!
Posted on 02/24/2008 10:39:21 AM PST by Decombobulator
MOSCOW. Feb 23 (Interfax-AVN) - After 2012-2015, the U.S. will be able to annihilate Russian strategic nuclear forces by a non-nuclear preemptive strike, said Konstantin Sivkov, the first vice president of the Russian Academy of Geopolitical Problems.
"I declare that the likelihood of a military threat is great as never before now," Sivkov told Interfax on Saturday.
Western military experts have recently started to talk about the possibility of attacking Russia and annexing its territory, Sivkov said. "Russia is supposed to be dismembered into three parts, with the Western part going to the European Union, the central part and Siberia to the U.S., and the eastern to China. This is a rough scenario," he said.
Russian armed forces will be unable to successfully counter an aggression, Sivkov said. "At the present time, the conventional armed forces cannot properly perform their duties in a regional war, like the Great Patriotic War, even in theory. Even if fully deployed, their potential is limited even in local wars. The only factor that deters [the U.S.] now is the nuclear arsenal," he said.
That would be stupid.
As stupid as “Yeah, we can get to Moscow before winter”
So let’s declare an emergency and make Vlad President for Life.
So transparent.
heh..yea, that’s been tried a couple of times already..
Kool Aid ! get your Russian Kool Aid!
No comrade, Blackwater will be sent to Siberia for your oil, mwa hahahahaha (Halliburton laugh).
Shouldn’t this be the other way around: mexico annexes California, China gets the west coast of the US and the EU gets New York?
So Russia has our equivalent of Alex Jones.
Is the guy selling books and Cd’s to Russians yet?
Instead of the NAU it will be called the ARU with Dollrubes as currency.
One would think if we WANTED to attack Russia, we would have done so a dceade ago when they were at their weakest and there was a news story every day about their failing military infrastructure.
Sounds like the guy worried about his ugly girlfriend straying. Dude, nobody wants her.
Why on earth would the U.S. WANT to attack Russia? They don’t have anything we can’t get for ourselves from other sources.
“I declare that the likelihood of a military threat is great as never before now,” Sivkov told Interfax on Saturday.”
This is meant for internal consumption. Putin has become increasingly aggressive and he needs to rally the masses to the threat the Motherland is facing. He is building a threat (real or imaginary) to justify the types of measures he plans on taking. He has to convince the masses it is us against the West and that Russia’s very existence hangs in the balance.
1998 was the perfect time for us to intervene in Russia. All we had to do was to use proxies in breakaway provinces. Divide and conquer.
Someone needs to get back on his meds pronto. Strengthening China is the last thing we should do.
This part is likely to happen naturally without our help, as eastern Russia depopulates and Chinese immigrants move in by the millions.
Honestly, why would we want it? Yay ice!
Russia, I know you’re big fans of being paranoid, but try to base it in reality once in awhile.
You mean Ravenwood? (cue spooky music)
Impossible, because by then Islam will have invaded all other countries BUT Russia and they will be true allies against the planetary war against Islam.
Surely it’s been more glibly stated, but we do tend to judge others by our own selves. Konstantin Sivkov, the first vice president of the Russian Academy of Geopolitical Problems is sure that “the likelihood of a military threat is great as never before now,” and claims that Western military experts have recently started to talk about the possibility of attacking Russia and annexing its territory. He says such things because he imagines what he might do if he were a powerful Western leader who had noted some temporary Russian vulnerability. Being a Russian, he cannot begin to even try to fathom the West’s lack of interest in conquest and martial plunder.
Agreed with you bereanway, but given that Russians have tasted our Capitalism, and have had access to the media of the west that would tell them there isn’t aggressive western rhetoric against them, how inclined are the Russian people to believe him? Thats not rhetorical, I really wonder. Maybe we will be lucky enough to avoid that new arms race because the Russians figure him out.
on 12-21-2012 !?
Why go all the way to russia to steel the resources, let’s just take over Canada instead.
>>You mean Ravenwood? (cue spooky music)<<
Jennings and Rall? Nah, Blackwater sounds meaner.
If we’re taking their Siberian oil, might as well take their Russian women too. (Sharapova etc) (wink)
This General has a lot in common with Democrats!!
Just for giggles, if we actually did this, why the Sam Hall would we give any part of Russia to the Chicoms, you Cletus-the-Slack-Jawed-Yokel clone? We stole it all, we keep it all.
Of course, assuming we would actually do something like this. It sounds too much like work to me, personally.
This Idiot has a lot more to fear from his next door neighbor China than the United States.But then thats Russia always looking for a scapegoat for their homemade problems.
Russia’s Population is dropping like a rock while China’s is taking off.Tell me who is more likly to attack Russia.
This is propaganda designed for domestic consumption.
Muslims will be a majority in the Russian Federation in 15 years.
The Chinese are already settling many areas in Russia.
Russia is just looking for reasons to build their forces.
Even if this is possible, and it might well be possible, nobody would want such a liability as Siberia. Russia has Siberia and its resources now, owns them completely, and cannot turn a profit on the land. Siberia might as well be on Mars or Titan for all the economic benefit it provides.
Russians are great people by and large, but I’ve never met a more paranoid bunch.
How can we take over Canada if we are not even allowed to drill for oil in Alaska?
“Can” and “want to” are two different things.
on 12-21-2012 !?
Another reason NOT to go on a diet
The USA already owns Canada. It is not necessary to ‘take over’ anything.
No blood for vodka!
Hitler attacked Russia with the strongest army in the world in 1941 and LOST.
Why would anyone try that again???
On the other hand, Russia has been successfully invaded several times - FROM THE EAST.
Yes, but fall of Moscow wouldnt mean a thing. Just how many troops one eeds to control area from Baltic to pacific? 2, 3, 4 million?
And losses of occupying forces within 3 year occupation period would be, what 100,000?
1998 was the perfect time for us to intervene in Russia. All we had to do was to use proxies in breakaway provinces. Divide and conquer.
2. The Central part is a lot of "Stans" with Borat-type inhabitants - don't know about you, but I'm not interested.
3. Siberia - are you kidding? I was in South Dakota in the military. That's as close as I want to get.
Bottom line- the Russkies are flattering themselves if they think they have anything we'd want or need.
That's not a rough scneario, that's the vodka talking after a long Russian Winter without enough sunlight!
The issue was taking Moscow. Most of Russia is a wasteland. Once Moscow was stabilized, they could take the oil fields in the Caucuses and not really give a feather or a fig about millions of Russians starving in Siberia. BTW, with Russia prostrate, the Japanese Army in Manchuria could be relied on to over run eastern Russia.
the truth is that the US has been in a position to wipe out Russia for probably the past six or seven years
here for example is a very interesting article in Foreign Affairs magazine called US Nuclear Primacy
Not realy.
Napoleon DID take Moscow, but was forced to withdraw, simply overstreached forces.
Also, Moscow is not target at present. If Russia is invaded by NATO, the goal would be northern parts of coastland with vast reserves pf natural gas and oil. Problem is they are 2-3,000 kilometers deep inside Russian territory, and for safeguarding that bug chung of land NATO would need 3-400,000 troops at least at all times.
And losess would be pretty high i thing. Average 10,000 per year killed on occupator side.
must check history books, but it is claimed that China held large parts of Siberia in the mid-1800s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.