Is NATO a Viable Military Organization?

[AZrailwhale]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

You’re really funny, delusional, but funny. Exactly where do you think Russia and China are going to evacuate those tens or hundreds of millions of civilians to ride out a nuclear war?

Good question. Russian analog of FEMA - MChS, have roughly 300 thousands of men and women, nearly 38 times more than FEMAFEMA (for the much lesser population), there are NCB-protection troops, there are deputies of chiefs for emergency situations at any significant businesses, who create and twice a year clarify plans of evacuation (for different circumstances), there are plans for police, National Guard, there are school programs of Security, Safety and Survivalnce (more advanced and militarized version of Health and Life Safety) and Initial Military Trainings, etc... The Russians take it really serious. China in 2019 started reforms of their Civil Defense based at the Russian system.

Russian NBC Protection Troops - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ministry of Emergency Situations (Russia) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What will they eat and drink afterwards?

They have the Federal Agency of State Reserves, there are enough of food to feed all Russians for three years.

Federal Agency for State Reserves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What is even more important - they have the Army, and rich and defenseless neighbours to blackmail or simply rob them.

Nuclear war is unsurvivable and any US president who allowed a attack on the USA without retaliation would be torn limb from limb instead of merely being impeached.

Nuclear war is survivable and even winnable, but only if you are well prepared for it. Russia is prepared. China is increasing its readiness. The US politicians prefer to ignore the problem.

The Russians have more FEMA type personnel because its a typical Russian centrally controlled organization. FEMA has very few real employees and they are managers and coordinators, not laborers. FEMA contracts out all real work to local and regional companies on short term emergency contracts. It’s far better and cheaper than the failed Russian idea of government employees doing the work.

Oh, yes... Try to repeat it to the people of New Orleans, how effective FEMA (and their local and regional companies) was in the pretty predictable situation of Hurricane Katrina. Another question is how well prepared are those "local companies" for actions in the post-attack environment.

New Orleans was a goat fuck by the local government that had inadequate plans and didn’t even follow the plans they did have. For instance, the city was depending on the school bus fleet to help evacuate those without personal transportation. The problem with that is they didn’t bother to tell either the drivers or managers of the school busses about the plan and despite being in hurricane alley New Orleans never even bother to have disaster drills. Contrast that to Los Angeles’ Northridge earthquake. LA had a plan, had rehearsed it every year and it worked. There was no panic,so starvation and despite being in the middle of a desert with at least ten times the population of NO, adequate water and food. FEMA had people in place within hours and had a fully functional headquarters filling a two story fifty thousand square foot headquarters within four days. I know that because I installed the phone system and helped install the expanded telephone cables for the building.

Yes. That's the point. When you have good plans, enough of material reserves, if your people are well trained - ok, there is no problem in the case of earthquake, flood or a nuclear strike. If you have not - ok, it's going to be something really bad. How many of "local companies" are really prepared for the nuclear war? Almost nothing.

The Russian Emercom is ready.

You can’t have enough stockpiles in a nuclear attack because if they are close enough to be useful, they will be either destroyed or irradiated and made useless. If they are far enough away to be safe, they can’t be transported safely through the irradiated areas to the survivors. That’s assuming that the kleptocrats who run your country won’t seize the stores and sell them on the black market for personal profit. Thanks, I’ll take free enterprise over Russian corruption.

 

[Silver Cat]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

You’re really funny, delusional, but funny. Exactly where do you think Russia and China are going to evacuate those tens or hundreds of millions of civilians to ride out a nuclear war?

Good question. Russian analog of FEMA - MChS, have roughly 300 thousands of men and women, nearly 38 times more than FEMAFEMA (for the much lesser population), there are NCB-protection troops, there are deputies of chiefs for emergency situations at any significant businesses, who create and twice a year clarify plans of evacuation (for different circumstances), there are plans for police, National Guard, there are school programs of Security, Safety and Survivalnce (more advanced and militarized version of Health and Life Safety) and Initial Military Trainings, etc... The Russians take it really serious. China in 2019 started reforms of their Civil Defense based at the Russian system.

Russian NBC Protection Troops - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ministry of Emergency Situations (Russia) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What will they eat and drink afterwards?

They have the Federal Agency of State Reserves, there are enough of food to feed all Russians for three years.

Federal Agency for State Reserves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What is even more important - they have the Army, and rich and defenseless neighbours to blackmail or simply rob them.

Nuclear war is unsurvivable and any US president who allowed a attack on the USA without retaliation would be torn limb from limb instead of merely being impeached.

Nuclear war is survivable and even winnable, but only if you are well prepared for it. Russia is prepared. China is increasing its readiness. The US politicians prefer to ignore the problem.

The Russians have more FEMA type personnel because its a typical Russian centrally controlled organization. FEMA has very few real employees and they are managers and coordinators, not laborers. FEMA contracts out all real work to local and regional companies on short term emergency contracts. It’s far better and cheaper than the failed Russian idea of government employees doing the work.

Oh, yes... Try to repeat it to the people of New Orleans, how effective FEMA (and their local and regional companies) was in the pretty predictable situation of Hurricane Katrina. Another question is how well prepared are those "local companies" for actions in the post-attack environment.

New Orleans was a goat fuck by the local government that had inadequate plans and didn’t even follow the plans they did have. For instance, the city was depending on the school bus fleet to help evacuate those without personal transportation. The problem with that is they didn’t bother to tell either the drivers or managers of the school busses about the plan and despite being in hurricane alley New Orleans never even bother to have disaster drills. Contrast that to Los Angeles’ Northridge earthquake. LA had a plan, had rehearsed it every year and it worked. There was no panic,so starvation and despite being in the middle of a desert with at least ten times the population of NO, adequate water and food. FEMA had people in place within hours and had a fully functional headquarters filling a two story fifty thousand square foot headquarters within four days. I know that because I installed the phone system and helped install the expanded telephone cables for the building.

Yes. That's the point. When you have good plans, enough of material reserves, if your people are well trained - ok, there is no problem in the case of earthquake, flood or a nuclear strike. If you have not - ok, it's going to be something really bad. How many of "local companies" are really prepared for the nuclear war? Almost nothing.

The Russian Emercom is ready.

You can’t have enough stockpiles in a nuclear attack because if they are close enough to be useful, they will be either destroyed or irradiated and made useless.

Most of those facilities are deep underground in ex-mines and can survive even direct hit of the nuclear warhead.

What is even more important, they have even "reserve of reserve facilities", which can be fulfilled just before the war.

If they are far enough away to be safe, they can’t be transported safely through the irradiated areas to the survivors.

And what is a problem to transport anything through the irradiated areas? It's not that they are going to stay there, drink contaminated water or eat contaminated food.

That’s assuming that the kleptocrats who run your country won’t seize the stores and sell them on the black market for personal profit. Thanks, I’ll take free enterprise over Russian corruption.

One can sell something on the "black market" only if:
1) there is a significant "black market" - which is possible only in very specific cases.
2) if the one is a part of the system. And if one's region is not effective in the restoring military production or mobilisation, if he allows people to chaotisate and play "New Orleans" - ok, one won't be a part of any system.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

You’re really funny, delusional, but funny. Exactly where do you think Russia and China are going to evacuate those tens or hundreds of millions of civilians to ride out a nuclear war?

Good question. Russian analog of FEMA - MChS, have roughly 300 thousands of men and women, nearly 38 times more than FEMAFEMA (for the much lesser population), there are NCB-protection troops, there are deputies of chiefs for emergency situations at any significant businesses, who create and twice a year clarify plans of evacuation (for different circumstances), there are plans for police, National Guard, there are school programs of Security, Safety and Survivalnce (more advanced and militarized version of Health and Life Safety) and Initial Military Trainings, etc... The Russians take it really serious. China in 2019 started reforms of their Civil Defense based at the Russian system.

Russian NBC Protection Troops - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ministry of Emergency Situations (Russia) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What will they eat and drink afterwards?

They have the Federal Agency of State Reserves, there are enough of food to feed all Russians for three years.

Federal Agency for State Reserves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What is even more important - they have the Army, and rich and defenseless neighbours to blackmail or simply rob them.

Nuclear war is unsurvivable and any US president who allowed a attack on the USA without retaliation would be torn limb from limb instead of merely being impeached.

Nuclear war is survivable and even winnable, but only if you are well prepared for it. Russia is prepared. China is increasing its readiness. The US politicians prefer to ignore the problem.

The Russians have more FEMA type personnel because its a typical Russian centrally controlled organization. FEMA has very few real employees and they are managers and coordinators, not laborers. FEMA contracts out all real work to local and regional companies on short term emergency contracts. It’s far better and cheaper than the failed Russian idea of government employees doing the work.

Oh, yes... Try to repeat it to the people of New Orleans, how effective FEMA (and their local and regional companies) was in the pretty predictable situation of Hurricane Katrina. Another question is how well prepared are those "local companies" for actions in the post-attack environment.

New Orleans was a goat fuck by the local government that had inadequate plans and didn’t even follow the plans they did have. For instance, the city was depending on the school bus fleet to help evacuate those without personal transportation. The problem with that is they didn’t bother to tell either the drivers or managers of the school busses about the plan and despite being in hurricane alley New Orleans never even bother to have disaster drills. Contrast that to Los Angeles’ Northridge earthquake. LA had a plan, had rehearsed it every year and it worked. There was no panic,so starvation and despite being in the middle of a desert with at least ten times the population of NO, adequate water and food. FEMA had people in place within hours and had a fully functional headquarters filling a two story fifty thousand square foot headquarters within four days. I know that because I installed the phone system and helped install the expanded telephone cables for the building.

Yes. That's the point. When you have good plans, enough of material reserves, if your people are well trained - ok, there is no problem in the case of earthquake, flood or a nuclear strike. If you have not - ok, it's going to be something really bad. How many of "local companies" are really prepared for the nuclear war? Almost nothing.

The Russian Emercom is ready.

You can’t have enough stockpiles in a nuclear attack because if they are close enough to be useful, they will be either destroyed or irradiated and made useless.

Most of those facilities are deep underground in ex-mines and can survive even direct hit of the nuclear warhead.

What is even more important, they have even "reserve of reserve facilities", which can be fulfilled just before the war.

If they are far enough away to be safe, they can’t be transported safely through the irradiated areas to the survivors.

And what is a problem to transport anything through the irradiated areas? It's not that they are going to stay there, drink contaminated water or eat contaminated food.

That’s assuming that the kleptocrats who run your country won’t seize the stores and sell them on the black market for personal profit. Thanks, I’ll take free enterprise over Russian corruption.

One can sell something on the "black market" only if:
1) there is a significant "black market" - which is possible only in very specific cases.
2) if the one is a part of the system. And if one's region is not effective in the restoring military production or mobilisation, if he allows people to chaotisate and play "New Orleans" - ok, one won't be a part of any system.

Are you kidding? If there wasn't a black market Russia wouldn't have any market at all.

 

[Silver Cat]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

You’re really funny, delusional, but funny. Exactly where do you think Russia and China are going to evacuate those tens or hundreds of millions of civilians to ride out a nuclear war?

Good question. Russian analog of FEMA - MChS, have roughly 300 thousands of men and women, nearly 38 times more than FEMAFEMA (for the much lesser population), there are NCB-protection troops, there are deputies of chiefs for emergency situations at any significant businesses, who create and twice a year clarify plans of evacuation (for different circumstances), there are plans for police, National Guard, there are school programs of Security, Safety and Survivalnce (more advanced and militarized version of Health and Life Safety) and Initial Military Trainings, etc... The Russians take it really serious. China in 2019 started reforms of their Civil Defense based at the Russian system.

Russian NBC Protection Troops - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ministry of Emergency Situations (Russia) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What will they eat and drink afterwards?

They have the Federal Agency of State Reserves, there are enough of food to feed all Russians for three years.

Federal Agency for State Reserves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What is even more important - they have the Army, and rich and defenseless neighbours to blackmail or simply rob them.

Nuclear war is unsurvivable and any US president who allowed a attack on the USA without retaliation would be torn limb from limb instead of merely being impeached.

Nuclear war is survivable and even winnable, but only if you are well prepared for it. Russia is prepared. China is increasing its readiness. The US politicians prefer to ignore the problem.

The Russians have more FEMA type personnel because its a typical Russian centrally controlled organization. FEMA has very few real employees and they are managers and coordinators, not laborers. FEMA contracts out all real work to local and regional companies on short term emergency contracts. It’s far better and cheaper than the failed Russian idea of government employees doing the work.

Oh, yes... Try to repeat it to the people of New Orleans, how effective FEMA (and their local and regional companies) was in the pretty predictable situation of Hurricane Katrina. Another question is how well prepared are those "local companies" for actions in the post-attack environment.

New Orleans was a goat fuck by the local government that had inadequate plans and didn’t even follow the plans they did have. For instance, the city was depending on the school bus fleet to help evacuate those without personal transportation. The problem with that is they didn’t bother to tell either the drivers or managers of the school busses about the plan and despite being in hurricane alley New Orleans never even bother to have disaster drills. Contrast that to Los Angeles’ Northridge earthquake. LA had a plan, had rehearsed it every year and it worked. There was no panic,so starvation and despite being in the middle of a desert with at least ten times the population of NO, adequate water and food. FEMA had people in place within hours and had a fully functional headquarters filling a two story fifty thousand square foot headquarters within four days. I know that because I installed the phone system and helped install the expanded telephone cables for the building.

Yes. That's the point. When you have good plans, enough of material reserves, if your people are well trained - ok, there is no problem in the case of earthquake, flood or a nuclear strike. If you have not - ok, it's going to be something really bad. How many of "local companies" are really prepared for the nuclear war? Almost nothing.

The Russian Emercom is ready.

You can’t have enough stockpiles in a nuclear attack because if they are close enough to be useful, they will be either destroyed or irradiated and made useless.

Most of those facilities are deep underground in ex-mines and can survive even direct hit of the nuclear warhead.

What is even more important, they have even "reserve of reserve facilities", which can be fulfilled just before the war.

If they are far enough away to be safe, they can’t be transported safely through the irradiated areas to the survivors.

And what is a problem to transport anything through the irradiated areas? It's not that they are going to stay there, drink contaminated water or eat contaminated food.

That’s assuming that the kleptocrats who run your country won’t seize the stores and sell them on the black market for personal profit. Thanks, I’ll take free enterprise over Russian corruption.

One can sell something on the "black market" only if:
1) there is a significant "black market" - which is possible only in very specific cases.
2) if the one is a part of the system. And if one's region is not effective in the restoring military production or mobilisation, if he allows people to chaotisate and play "New Orleans" - ok, one won't be a part of any system.

Are you kidding? If there wasn't a black market Russia wouldn't have any market at all.

Black markets usually exists where and when the government regulation exists. And, talking about the food market, modern Russia is much less socialistic country than the USA after Obama's "FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, H.R. 2751".

 

[Silver Cat]

Shall we continue our game?
You'd exchanged almost empty and sheltred Vladivostok ( 8 missiles, 16 warheads, two air bursts, roughly 10 thousands killed) at New-York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houstone and Phoenix (10 missiles, 100 warheads, 95 air bursts, roughly - plus 3 millions killed, 10 millions wounded).
All your allies (returning to the subject of the thread) are very impressed. The Japans blinked first. USFJ are arrested and going to be interned, Japan declared neutrality.
Germany and France value your eagerness to sacrifice yourself and ready to fight, but prefer to wait until you'll have reasonable plan of war, or the Russians wasted most of their ordnance at American cities.

How many American citizens are you ready to sacrifice to buy advantage for the EU?

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

If Russia goes nuclear, so will we! BTW, learn to spell deterrence.

Yes, that's the problem. American plans are concentrated on the prevention of the war, not winning the war. "If the deterrence is failed, let's do "something", or, may be, "nothing"." All, what those military planners are thinking is psychology, facades, good look, and so on. Most of American "military" scenarios begin with tensions and finish by all-out nuclear exchange. Most of Russian military scenarios begin with nuclear exchange, and finish by the delimitation of the Canada-Mexican border (or sign of unconditional surrender by American government).
The last more or less realistic American conception of the "protracted war" was created in 1982.

Really? What is your expertise in this area instead of being an armchair quarterback?

Is the commander of the US Strategic Command, Adm. Charles Richard "an armchair quarterback", too?

Charles Richard, U.S. Strategic Command chief: Nuclear war with China or Russia ‘real possibility’

The United States must be ready for a nuclear war with China or Russia and seek new ways to deter both countries’ use of newly acquired advanced strategic weapons, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Command is warning in a major new review of the global balance of nuclear forces.

m.washingtontimes.com

He wrote:
"Government and military leaders need to better understand the new dangers of nuclear conflict and fashion new concepts of deterrence and — if needed — nuclear war-fighting strategies."

"Until we, as a [Defense] Department, come to understand, if not accept, what we are facing and what should be done about it, we run the risk of developing plans we cannot execute and procuring capabilities that will not deliver desired outcomes,” Adm. Richard argued. “In the absence of change, we are on the path, once again, to prepare for the conflict we prefer, instead of one we are likely to face."

Nuclear war is pretty possible, because there are ways to win (or loose) the nuclear war.

Ok. Let's play the game.
---------

1) While the USA are preparing their forces to send in Ukraine, Russia, prepares her own attack: secretly increasing amount of warheads at SSBNs (in violation of New Start, of course, but nobody cares), move tactical nukes to the regular forces, chaotise Ukraine by local agenda to slow down deployment of the US Forces. Putin calls Biden and ask: "Do you really gone bananas and really want to proceed? " If Baiden say yes, then both side proceed.
2) Russia start "civil defense drills" and particularly evactuate their cities.
3) 7 SSBNs of the Northern Fleet, simultaneously crush ice in the Canadian sector of Arctic and launch 7x16x10 - 1120 warheads (95% probability to kill each) in 224 seconds against, say, 500 military targets, including all 400 siloses, strategic air bases and some ports. Attack at "suppressed ballistic trajectory " from the blinking eyes distance, so there is no time to react.
Also, 56 Tu-95MS launch 16 Kontact-2 each (totaly - 896) anti-sat missiles with X-ray laser warheads (say, with 50% single-shot kill probability) US satellites (especially navigation and communication) significantly degraded.
4) Then, Putin declare in public: "You, American, just lost, say, five millions of people, most of them - just a collateral damage, because we avoided attack civilian targets. You still have 327 millions of people, but only few SSBNs with few hundreds of strategic nukes. We have effective ABD, our population is already evacuated and sheltered, our nukes are cocked, locked and ready to launch. The only result of your potentional attack will be death of few thousands of random Russian civilians and our economical losses. But then we'll start massive retaliation - for every launched warhead we'll destroy five your cities. We don't want to kill American civilians, but we definitely will, if you force us. Right now we suggest you cheasefire, and peace negotiations. All what we want (right now) is withdrawn of your forces from Eurasia. If a single missile is launched - we'll demand Alaska, too and your complete denuclearisation." This is called the "Postattack blackmail".
Then, he says to all other countries: "Hey, guys. If you want to join the game and be nuked - you may not intern American forces deployed on your lands. Otherwise, you should be good neutral states. Neutral states don't allow belligerent states to act freely in their territory, in their air and water. Of course, you may accept some of their wounded or refugees, but you should not send in the USA anything that looks like medicine, food, fuel, weapon, munitions and so on. Right now we had suggested them negotiations, try to use all your diplomatic power, to force them to accept our terms, pls".
This is called "in-war deterrence".
-------------

The one question I have is your pay that Vlad and the Kremlin are providing. Is it worth it? I mean after all, fully half of your facts and figures you are citing are flat out WRONG!

I can't dispute them because this information is highly classified. Suffice it to say, you are a Russki plant talking out your ass!

Goodbye!

I suggest everyone else put your Communist ass on ignore also.

Can you repeat this in the face of men and women of USSTRATCOM and US Naval War College, who search and find vulnerabilities in the system of the nuclear deterrence?

USSTRATCOM & U.S. Naval War College Conducted DEGRE Series of Wargames

U.S. Strategic Command, in association with the U.S. Naval War College, conducted a Deterrence and Escalation Game and Review Exercise April 12 to 16 in Newport, RI. The DEGRE series of wargames

www.stratcom.mil

 

[Silver Cat]

 

[Silver Cat]

Top military official warns China and Russia are modernizing nuclear weapons faster than US

The top US military official who runs the American nuclear arsenal warned that China and Russia are modernizing their nuclear weapons and capabilities faster than the US, saying during a congressional hearing on Tuesday that if it does not start investing more in nuclear defense and...

edition.cnn.com

--------------------------
(CNN)The top US military official who runs the American nuclear arsenal warned that China and Russia are modernizing their nuclear weapons and capabilities faster than the US, saying during a congressional hearing on Tuesday that if it does not start investing more in nuclear defense and infrastructure, the US will be "at risk of losing credibility in the eyes of our adversaries."
Russia is "aggressively engaged" in "conventional nuclear capability development and modernization, and are now roughly 80% complete while we are at zero," saId Adm. Charles Richard, the head of US Strategic Command, which oversees the US nuclear arsenal.
---------------------

 

[frigidweirdo]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Really?

 

[frigidweirdo]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Really?

"Really?" plus some video I'm not going to watch.

Wow, what a reply.

 

[Dayton3]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Utterly ridiculouse

 

[frigidweirdo]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Utterly ridiculouse

Am I supposed to gain anything from your two words?

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Really?

"Really?" plus some video I'm not going to watch.

Wow, what a reply.

It's a quite short video, a quote from "Starship Troopers" movie.
--------------------
“- Ace Levy: Sir, I don't understand. Who needs a knife in a nuke fight anyway? All you gotta do is push a button, sir.
- Sgt. Zim: Cease fire. Put your hand on that wall trooper. Put your hand on that wall! The enemy can not push a button... if you disable his hand. Medic!”
---------------
How effective will be "hacking and mind games" in the radioactive ruins of the European cities?

 

[Dayton3]

If you would exercise any common sense you would realize

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Utterly ridiculouse

Am I supposed to gain anything from your two words?

If you exercised any common sense you would know that

1) It is foolish to believe that future wars are going to be won or lost based on capabilities which have never been demonstrated before.

2) It is foolish to believe that some geeks siitting at keyboards could ever win or lose wars.

3) It is foolish to NOT BELIEVE in the literally thousands of years of recorded history were wars have been won (or lost) by the presence of armed troops on the ground.

Gain that.

 

[Flash]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

The only people pleased with the Chicoms now are the Joe Dufus family members. They got a billion dollar investment in exchange for selling out America.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If you would exercise any common sense you would realize

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

Well, the thing is that the US spends more than 2% because the US likes warring. For the EU, they don't need to spend 2% because they don't go warring around the world. It's certainly enough to dissuade Russia if the EU actually wants to put troops on the ground or even bomb them a bit.

Modern warfare won't be fought with tanks and planes. It'll be hacking and mind games.

Utterly ridiculouse

Am I supposed to gain anything from your two words?

If you exercised any common sense you would know that

1) It is foolish to believe that future wars are going to be won or lost based on capabilities which have never been demonstrated before.

2) It is foolish to believe that some geeks siitting at keyboards could ever win or lose wars.

3) It is foolish to NOT BELIEVE in the literally thousands of years of recorded history were wars have been won (or lost) by the presence of armed troops on the ground.

Gain that.

See, I was in for a serious discussion. But what you've written isn't. Bye.

 

[Dayton3]

See, I was in for a serious discussion.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

[Paulie]

NATO has kept the peace for the past 70 plus years. So yes it is viable military organization despite the previous president's efforts to destroy it.

Kept the peace? Where has there been any peace over the last 70 years?

 

[Dayton3]

NATO has kept the peace for the past 70 plus years. So yes it is viable military organization despite the previous president's efforts to destroy it.

Kept the peace? Where has there been any peace over the last 70 years?

Central Europe for starters and related to NATO.