The Patriot Files Forums  

Go Back   The Patriot Files Forums > Other Conflicts > Cold War

Post New Thread  Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-23-2019, 02:06 PM
Boats's Avatar
Boats Boats is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sauk Village, IL
Posts: 21,784
Exclamation Russia flouts Nuke Strength vs US provocations

Russia flouts Nuke Strength vs US provocations
By: Peter Duveen - OpEdNews Op Eds 2/23/2019 at 19:40:57
RE: https://www.opednews.com/articles/Ru...90223-225.html

Hebron, New York, February 22, 2019--Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin's speech delivered on the 20th of February, 2019 in Moscow should be must reading for every American. In it, Putin spells out Russian preparations for nuclear war against the United States.

Not only does the Russian president emphasize newly unveiled weapon systems that will, according to Putin, put America at a supreme disadvantage in the event of a nuclear exchange, but also announces that the targets of Russian weapons have been revised to include not only military installations and infrastructure, but also locations where military planning takes place.

One could easily conclude from Putin's careful wording that the list of targets has been broadened to include the "White House," home of the U.S. president. It likely also includes the Capitol Building, where the U.S. Congress convenes, since Congress is certainly part of the planning for any war. And it must also include many of the buildings connected with the myriad of administrative departments of the U.S. government, along with various private think tanks that supply the government with position papers, research and policy formulation. It might even include the numerous media outlets such as National Public Radio and its affiliates that serve as surrogate mouthpieces for the U.S. State Department, the CIA and the Pentagon war machine.

Certainly, after Putin's very direct warning to Americans, I personally would not choose Washington D.C. as a place where I would want to spend any length of time. I would veer away from any area where there were military installations, but also offices of Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI and branches of any number of federal agencies. Rural is the way to go, for no city connected with the Federal government through its franchises is really safe. And Putin said, no bones about it, in a nuclear exchange, Russia would have the advantage. "Just do the math," Putin urged the American leadership.

Let's listen to Russian President Putin in his own words:

"I am saying this directly and openly now, so that no one can blame us later, so that it will be clear to everyone in advance what is being said here. Russia will be forced to create and deploy weapons that can be used not only in the areas we are directly threatened from, but also in areas that contain decision-making centres for the missile systems threatening us."

I would read this to mean that installations such as the Pentagon in northern Virginia and the U.S. president's domicile in Washington, D.C. could be targets for nuclear-armed missiles. They are all planning centers, just as Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi's home was made a target by NATO as a planning center, and was, in fact, successfully destroyed.

In the event a reader or listener may have thought that Putin's reference to "decision-making centers" was an off-handed one-of-a-kind comment, the Russian president, in the next few sentences, drives his point home.

"These weapons will fully correspond to the threats directed against Russia in their technical specifications, including flight times to these decision-making centres. We know how to do this and will implement these plans immediately, as soon as the threats to us become real."

The readiness posture is a reaction to the possibility that the United States, after having removed itself from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty that banned intermediate range missiles, will outfit Russia's immediate neighbors with missiles capable of striking Moscow, according to Putin, within "12 minutes" after launch.

Why did the United States want to withdraw from a treaty which seemed to secure the peace between the two most lethally armed nations on earth? U.S. officials claim that Russia has been in violation of the treaty, which Russia has denied. But Russian officials, including Putin in the speech at hand, has also clearly outlined U.S. violations of the treaty which have continued for years. Again, Putin:

"Americans began developing and using medium-range missiles, calling them discretionary 'target missiles' for missile defence. Then they began deploying Mk-41 universal launch systems that can make offensive combat use of Tomahawk medium-range cruise missiles possible.

"I am talking about this and using my time and yours because we have to respond to the accusations that are leveled at us. But having done everything I have just described, the Americans openly and blatantly ignored the provisions envisaged by articles 4 and 6 of the INF Treaty. According to Item 1, Article VI (I am quoting): 'Each Party shall eliminate all intermediate-range missiles and the launchers of such missiles...so that...no such missiles, launchers...shall be possessed by either party.' Paragraph 1 of Article VI provides that (and I quote) 'upon entry into force of the Treaty and thereafter, neither Party may produce or flight-test any intermediate-range missile, or produce any stages or launchers of such missiles.' End of quote.

"Using medium-range target missiles and deploying launchers in Romania and Poland that are fit for launching Tomahawk cruise missiles, the US has openly violated these clauses of the Treaty. They did this some time ago. These launchers are already stationed in Romania and nothing happens."

Russia, Putin noted, has responded to such a possible confrontation by developing a host of weapons systems that will successfully meet the threat posed by American plans to deploy the above-mentioned missiles. These weapon systems include hypersonic missiles that sail calmly through the air, rarified or un, at Mach 9, he claimed. Also ready for deployment or in the works are two novel creations. "The Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile of unlimited range," said Putin, "and the Poseidon nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle of unlimited range are successfully undergoing tests." When these weapons are perfected, one imagines that they can wander through the air or sea for long periods until it is deemed amenable to Russia's purpose to have them strike a particular target in the United States. Putin said the first submarine capable of launching such an unmanned vehicle would be ready in the Spring.

While peace was the preferred mode for his country's development, Putin said Russia was prepared to defend itself.

"Our efforts to enhance our defence capability are for only one purpose," Putin asserted: "to ensure the security of this country and our citizens so that nobody would even consider pressuring us, or launching an aggression against us."

The reader is referred to Putin's complete speech, translated into English and posted on the website of the Russian Embassy in Washington, D.C. It is highly recommended reading for all Americans.

Now what preparations are American officials undertaking in order to protect the American public from such a robust reaction by the defensive forces of the Russian Federation? It is safe to say that virtually no preparations are being made to protect the American public. My guess, uneducated as it may be, is that the American government, judging from its inaction or lack of interest in the matter, is ready to sustain casualties on the order of a hundred million people. Perhaps I have heard or read that number bandied about in broadcasts or writings on the subject. Does Russia have an interest in perpetrating such a calamity upon the United States? No, Putin says. The military preparations, he insists, are defensive measures.

"Russia is not threatening anyone," claims Putin, "and all we do in terms of security is simply a response, which means that our actions are defensive. We are not interested in confrontation and we do not want it, especially with a global power like the United States of America."

Can we say the same about the U.S. government? My own assessment of U.S actions and policies is that America is egging for a war, a military confrontation that can be won in spite of the millions of deaths on the North American continent that it would entail.

So, my dear friends, what is to be done? It is unlikely that the average citizen, who bears the most risk, will be able to influence the course of events regarding conflict with Russia. What Americans can do is move to rural areas distant from the installations Putin would of necessity target. The construction of bomb shelters would not be an untoward reaction to the threat of a nuclear attack. And, of course, a stock of edibles that could sustain human life for as long as a month or two could certainly come in handy if American provocations exceeded any "red line" that Russia has set in its own defense. These are preparations the average citizen may take without eliciting undue government interference.

If citizens have any influence over the policies of the state in which they reside, they might implore the state government to rid itself of any entity that might be a target of a Russian strike. It might become a priority for some far-seeing officials to position their states to become less vulnerable to the reckless and provocative actions and policies of the federal government.

Ultimately, if America receives a retaliatory bush-whacking from Russia, there are perhaps positive developments that may emerge. Certainly Russia would ultimately not allow any of the crafters of the malicious U.S. foreign policy that precipitated the attack to remain at large, and when they and their cohorts were located, the Russians would deal with them in a direct and effective manner.

What would Benjamin Franklin, that great man of letters, say if he were to see how the experiment in democracy ended through a nuclear conflagration? I doubt he would be surprised in the slightest. After all, he was a scientist who delved into the causes and effects of lightning and electricity, and invented new designs for wood stoves that were decided improvements on earlier designs. Surely Franklin was a man, more than others around him, who knew the power of scientific innovation and how it could ultimately affect the destiny of human life on earth. He would have understood where science was taking the human race. And politically, he must have known deep in his gut that in the long run, he was backing a troubled proposition. When asked what the Constitutional Convention of the late 1780s had agreed upon, he is reported to have quipped, "a republic, if you can keep it."
__________________
Boats

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

"IN GOD WE TRUST"
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.