By Aleksandr Zapolskis
Translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard
cross posted with http://www.stalkerzone.org/aleksandr-zapolskis-why-is-the-us-withdrawing-from-the-inf-treaty/
source: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2455477.html
The supreme legislative body of America coordinated and approved the text of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the 2018 financial year (in the US it doesn’t coincide with the calendar year). At first sight it is an absolutely routine affair. In any country that has an army, the budget for expenses on it passes through the procedure of official coordination and approval. However, its contents becoming public unconditionally demonstrates that all of American’s current rhetoric about the growth of Russia’s military aggression in reality only serves as a way of masking the US’ own steps, which were thought up and planned more than 15 years ago.
I.e., when Russia was still in a deep knockout after the collapse of the USSR and tried in every way to be incorporated into the western system of the world, even at the price of downgrading its status to the level of a very junior partner, and when international security was reliably ensured by a system of treaties, including the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. But Washington decided to reject them already back then.
However, let’s return to NDAA-2018. American common and political psychology is based on messianism and the certainty of its belonging to the “side of Good and Light”, which demands public proof of its own correctness that is often provided by directly defaming the opponent. In this case, according to article 1244, Trump is obliged to present convincing proof to Congress that Russia doesn’t violate (!) the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty no later than January 15, 2019. Exactly like this – proving a negative. Presumption of innocence? What nonsense do you speak of?
If the president doesn’t convince senatorial commissions (at least the budgetary and national security ones), the guilt of Russia will be considered as unambiguously proven, thereby giving America the legitimate right – of course, only as a compelled countermeasure – to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and to start developing their own short-range and intermediate-range missiles.
Information about the Russian cruise missile 9M729 project, designated by NATO as SSC-8, provided by the American intelligence community forms the basis of this accusation. According to intelligence agencies it has a range of up to 2,500 kilometers, therefore Russia has unambiguously violated the conditions of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
However, difficulties with objective proof traditionally appeared. Besides three extremely muddy and doubtful even by American legal standards pictures of “something being launched from the ground”, the accusation isn’t backed up by other facts.
The irony of events is that 9M729, designated in a number of sources as “Novator”, indeed existed. Only not as an independent project, but as a research element of a project aimed at improving the 9M728 missiles of the “Iskander M” system, which possesses a range of 50 to 500 kilometers and completely conforms with the treaty’s conditions. However, American hawks believe that in reality the operative-tactical systems of the Russians can shoot five times further “if the missile is fully fuelled”. Well, or let Moscow present full detailed technical documentation for “Iskander M” and for the entire range of its armaments…
Although it shouldn’t be excluded that American satellites photographed certain stages of the flight or launch testing of the 3M54 “Kalibr” sea-based cruise missile project, which also completely conforms to the requirements of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. The vice-chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Army (an analog of Russia’s General Staff) and four-star General Paul Selva admits this fact, but not loudly or insistently.
In a word, all these accusations (and legislators also demand from Trump to prove that all these latest Russian “Sarmats”, “Poseidons”, and “Avangards” don’t violate another treaty – START-3) look like outright defamation. This is because the true reason lies in something else. The military-political leadership of the US in the first half of the 2000’s became aware of the tendency of America’s nuclear triad to become obsolete.
And this indeed became a problem. And a complex one too. If Trump doesn’t manage to “justify the Russians“, NDAA-2018 provides the acceleration of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) and Long Range Stand Off Weapon (LRSO) programs and also the assignment of money for the development of new low-capacity warheads for the land “Minuteman-3” ballistic missile, which, by the way, forms the basis of the land components of the US strategic nuclear forces, and which Congress directly forbids Trump from somehow reducing.
Purely for reference: the Ground-based Strategic Deterrent program (GBSD) provides the development of new silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, which will replace the “Peacekeeper“ until 2070−2075. What’s interesting here is the following: firstly, the US Air Force started to consider the requests of “Northrop”, “Boeing”, and “Lockheed” already in the summer of 2016 and started to formulate the technical requirements of the competition since August, 2015 – approximately one year after RAND analysts published a large piece of research proving the unacceptability for the US of decreasing the quantity of silo-based missiles below 300 units. That’s why in the GBSD it was planned to develop 400 units for $62 billion (for the period from 2015 to 2044), $14 billion of which was earmarked for research and development, and $48.5 billion – for purchasing the missiles themselves. Although it is very unlikely that they will be able to stay within the budget.
Unlike GBSD, the LRSO program officially is apparently “America’s answer to the Russian ‘Kalibr'”, because it concerns the creation of an intermediate-range cruise missile (up to 5,000 km). It’s just that the US Department of Defence announced in December, 2012 the competition in which these missiles are being developed by “Lockheed Martin” and “Raytheon”, who received the next tranche of $900 million each for the next 54 months, and started to prepare for it in general since January, 2011.
And all of this is happening because since the beginning of the first years of this century the Pentagon has faced three insuperable problems. Its allegedly insuperable power in reality was created in the 1970’s and has considerably faded over three decades – against the background of the “main enemy’s” successes in the development of its air defense/missile defense possibilities. Besides this, the termination of the production of the components base has strongly increased the service cost. Well, and the most important thing: the US doesn’t produce weapons-grade plutonium any more, and there is reason to believe that by the present moment they have already critically lost the technology itself. But the laws of physics are relentless. The half-life period limits the warranty period of service of nuclear warheads to 20-25 years. Then it is required to re-equip warheads, which in the conditions of a “raw materials” shortage results in, conditionally, two new ones from three old ones.
The package of US strategic nuclear forces modernisation programs and the declared purpose of reducing the capacity of warheads are explained by precisely this circumstance. Having found themselves in front of the inevitability to either reduce the quantity of warheads or to decrease their capacity, Generals chose the latter option in the hope of compensating for the force of the explosion by a growth in the guarantee of arriving at the target and the accuracy of any hit.
In turn, politicians at the turn of the century strongly wanted to somehow reduce the price of the entire triad by transitioning the technical part to the modern component-software base, including with the wide use of cheap commercial civil solutions. This is because to this day this same “Minuteman” loads combat tasks from 5-inch disks, due to the rarity of the more expensive terabyte hard drives.
But the system of international agreements that developed throughout the second half of the 20th century was on the way to its desired aim. It is impossible to include a new overland cruise missile because its development is forbidden by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, but they need it very much because the entire geopolitical strategy of the existence of the American state is crucially based on the guaranteed opportunity to defeat any pig-headed enemy in a military way, including by means of the strategic nuclear forces. Whereas improving air defense/missile defense systems reduced the probability of success to a critical level. The recent American cruise missile raid on Syria clearly confirmed the validity of these fears. And after all, the Russian missile defense systems practically weren’t used in any way…
As is known, when a gentlemen plays by the rules and stops winning, they immediately prefer to break them. This is exactly what the US does now, hypocritically trying to discover a convenient reason for self-justification. Who else in the Western world can be guilty of aggression if it’s not Russia?!
“And on the way to peace lies Russia”
However, if to speak seriously, this question in reality isn’t so straightforward and unambiguous. No matter how one treats nuclear weapons as such, it is impossible to not recognise that its existence is the only thing that stops the planet from falling into World War III at least since 2014, and even since the events of August 2008. I stress – at least, because the chances of NATO strategists “solving the Russian issue” has been repeatedly estimated since 2003-2004, when it became clear that the “Chechen war” won’t lead to the state disintegration of the Russian Federation. Only Russian strategic nuclear weapons that are capable of turning the whole world, together with the US, into one big nuclear dump with a guarantee prevented these plans from being realised.
However, the observance of the developed system of contractual restrictions has now reached a critical point that technically obliges the US to reduce the size of all their nuclear potential. Including the strategic nuclear potential, being a fundamental element of national security. They can’t opt for this also because of geopolitical and economic reasons. Only the existence of the strategic nuclear forces allows America to use its army to push forward its geopolitical interests in other countries without risking retaliation on the territory of the US. And without the American army abroad, the entire financial pyramid of dollar domination crumbles, causing the country whose level of debt is 120% of GDP to instantly become as bankrupt as Greece.
So Trump still hasn’t spoken in front of Congress with proof, but the result of the procedure is already rather precisely predictable. Russia will be unambiguously found guilty, and the US will be acquitted as the side on the defence. Moreover, it will be successful since it will be possible to immediately show the people “a result that is almost ready”, which appeared literally from thin air “thanks to the undoubted scientific-technical superiority of America”.
Whether or not the world will become safer, it is difficult to say. Formally, the overall balance of nuclear forces will remain, thereby providing the effectiveness of the nuclear deterrence in general. But it is necessary to recognise that the rejection of public agreements is fraught with the unpredictable development of research and development capable of leading towards scientific developments that will indeed destroy the balance of forces. And then their possessor can have an insurmountable temptation. A big nuclear war is, of course, very horrifying, but when the alternative is the “great depression 2.0” capable in general of destroying the US as a State, the criteria for evaluating the acceptability of the degree of damage strongly changes.
But the most important thing: it will for sure launch a new arms race. Moreover, in its most expensive and budget consuming nuclear segment. Including for our budget too, because we will be obliged to respond to their successes with our own. In short, for the umpteenth time “our foreign partners” force Russia to act according to old wisdom: Si vis pacem, para bellum. But it is us [Russia – ed] who is the aggressor, of course…
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) bill that is currently under consideration by the US legislature is NDAA FY 2019 (Oct. 1, 2018, through Sept. 30, 2019).
The NDAA for FY 18 (already passed by Congress and signed into law by the President) is the one to which the author is referring (not the one is currently in the process of being passed back and forth among the House, the Senate, and conference committees). I think.
Let’s start with a quote from the above piece:
Obsolete is something of an overstatement, but it is very expensive to keep dedicated silo based missiles in isolated locations. As an undesirable posting, these facilities tend to draw the most junior crews allowed by the regs. This leads to issues with “readiness”.
Tomahawk derived U.S. cruise missiles already have capabilities outside a strict interpretation of INF. So do Russian cruise missiles.
Given that both sides have already exceeded the scope of INF it would be mutually beneficial for Trump and Putin to jointly wind down the INF Treaty. The U.S. would gain by bringing strategic weapons to areas that are more easily staffed. Removing limits on “offical” development would offer similar gains to Russia.
Remember CHINA is not limited by the INF . Their intermediate range capabilities are much more threatening to Russia than the U.S. Thus, jointly dissolving the INF offers an immediate and tangible benefit to Russia’s military posture.
Nor are the NATO countries. I always thought that these treaties were always lopsided putting Russia in a disadvantageous position.
Obsolete may be misleading word. The “poot”, the pretty little ball of Pu and so on is atomically unstable. Thus it changes into non-pootable material over time. In the case of U235 gadgets this is less of a problem, but such gadgets are not elegant, and they are not efficient. The SA white government built, they say 12 “gun style U235 gadgets…where are they now? Those would have very long shelf-lives… Anyway the Pu types decay, and also in process of decay, damage nearby components…these machine are self-destructing over time by their essential physics. This is immutable. Evidently God dislikes Pu, but feels better about U…most of which is U238 and nasty, toxic, but ok if you leave it in the ground… Ya cannot make a gadget outa U238.
By the way, submarine reactors use >90%U235 for good technical reasons, so when, for example, Persia proposes to build atomic powered submarines they are by implication saying that the are going to separate out U235 in fairly large quantities – the Hiroshima gadget used about 75 pounds of the stuff, as nearly as Coster-Mullen and others calculate. – The fuel charge mass for an Nth atomic sub? An approximate guess…lots… plenty for a H type gadget, so there’s going to be doubt about what and who and where…always.
Pretty much anybody, any State or large economic entity with anything on the ball can make a workable gadget…the only “secret” was that it was possible to do it…and that horse left the stable before most of us were born.
“spensive and of dubious utility, but not very difficult.
Most commercial aircraft “exceed the INF(T) today, by the way. They have programmable autopilots and many can be controlled from outside the aircraft beyond any pilots’ capacity to over-ride, save maybe with an axe. (there are those who say that’s what happened over Shanksville Pa.)
Thinking about this statement: “…Remember CHINA is not limited by the INF . Their intermediate range capabilities are much more threatening to Russia than the U.S. Thus, jointly dissolving the INF offers an immediate and tangible benefit to Russia’s military posture…:
One might ask how eliminating the INF would change the perspectives of each party?
Well, China would then see Russian flying bombs as an increasing threat. Also Murkin flying bombs would be seen by China as increasing threat.
Realistically China would respond to capabilities as they change…spending more effort to counter such capabilities, eh?
All three actors would suffer increased cost and waste and discover their security decreased.
I do not see any benefit to China, or Russia, or the US stemming from elimination of INF (T).
Elsewhere I have pointed out that all modern flying machines with enough range are equal to “weapons” and with modern autopilots may be remotely controlled. Regrettably it is not possible to rectify the technical flaws in the INF when a major party has become not capable of contract.
Thus all three parties shall suffer and zero number of parties benefit, unless you count those shares of “Luckup Inc” or “Ammo-Is-Us” stock…
Back in those foggy ‘;mists of time’, I have a feeling that the main reason for the breakdown of the USSR was that it was forced to compete with the US in the ‘Arms Race’. That cost was too great for the Russians.
Thirty years later, it appears that now the Russian Federation is pushing the US of A into an ‘Arms Race’ that would be the final nail in America’s dollar disintegration. Thus the 1990’s prediction appears to be coming true; the only problem for America is that the sharks that ripped the wealth out of the USSR all reside in the US, and they will be even more ruthless in collecting ‘their’ assets..
What I truly love about all of this is that way back, after Churchill announced the start of the ‘Cold War’ in 1946 and the race began between the US and the USSR to build a military base on the Moon, was that despite the US holding most of the cards, it was the USSR that lead at every point of the race.
Russia won the first card. On the 4th October, 1957 Russia launched its first satellite named ‘Sputnik’.
Russia then won the second card when on the 3rd November 1957 it launched ‘Laika’ a dog aboard Sputnik 2 into space which supposedly survived for approximately 7 days. It was revealed only recently that the dog actually died within 5-7 hours of the launch.
Now at this time the Russians were building a sophisticated research satellite which was to become Sputnik 3, but it was not to be ready until December 1957.
If we consider the statement by Mikhail Rudenko, senior engineer-experimenter with Experimental Design Office 456 made on the 24th January 2008, that cosmonauts Aleksei Ledovskikh (late 1957), Serenti Shaborin (February 1958) and Andrei Mitkov (January 1959) all died during their flights and their names were never officially published, then we must realise that there was more than one ‘Sputnik 3’ satellite.
If Rudenko’s statement is correct, then the only craft available for the cosmonaut Aleksei Ledovskikh to perish in late 1957 had to have been the ‘Sputnik 3’ craft that was being built in October 1957 and was expected to be ready by December 1957. The same with Serenti Shaborin for his flight on the 3rd February 1958.
However the next actual Russian satellite that was called ‘Sputnik 3’ was launched on the 15th May 1958, and was an unmanned flight. We now have two manned flights followed by the third flight which was unmanned.
According to Wikipedia, Sputnik 3 was a scientific laboratory satellite, containing twelve instruments for geophysical research of the upper atmosphere. Wikipedia states, “The outer radiation belts of the Earth were detected during this flight.” Wikipedia also states that Sputnik 3’s “tape recorder failed however, making it unable to measure the Van Allen Belts.”
There is one last piece of information that should be considered. Sputnik 3 remained in orbit until the 6th April 1960.
So what do the Russians say about Sputnik 3? Let us look at the Russian, Sergey Korolyov.
“This string of successes ran out with the launch of Sputnik 3. This instrument-laden spacecraft was sent into orbit on May 15th the following year. However the tape recorder that was to store the data failed after launch. As a result the discovery and mapping of the Van Allen radiation belts were left to the American’s ‘Explorer 4’ in July.”
A list of the suspected lost Cosmonauts
May 1960 Unnamed cosmonaut lost when his orbiting space capsule veered off course.
November 1960 An SOS message in Morse code from a troubled spacecraft.
February 1961 Recorded the suffocation of a cosmonaut.
April 1961 Just prior to Yuri Gagarin’s flight, a capsule circled the Earth three times before re-entering the Earth’s atmosphere. *(This cosmonaut was actually Vladimir Ilyushin who was badly injured when the capsule crashed in Mainland China.)
May 1961 Weak calls for help from an orbiting capsule.
October 1961 A Soviet spacecraft veered off course and vanished into deep space.
November 1962 A space capsule bounced off the Earth’s atmosphere during re-entry and disappeared.
November 1963 Unnamed female cosmonaut perished on re-entry.
April 1964 Cosmonaut lost when capsule burnt up on re-entry.
The American situation
With the American Military’s Operation ‘Paperclip’ that returned to America with Wernher von Braun and his ‘team’ of rocket scientists, Dr James Van Allen was elected chairman of the V-2 Upper Atmosphere Panel in December 1947. So just how did Van Allen utilise the German V-2 rocket technology? He apparently didn’t.
According to Wikipedia, 15 months after Van Allen was elected chairman of the V-2 Upper Atmosphere Panel, Van Allen was working on the idea of a rocket/balloon system called Rockoon with Navel Cmdrs, Lewis and Halvorson, along with Dr S. Fred Singer whilst on the USS Norton Sound. [Dr. S. Fred Singer* First publications predicting the existence of trapped radiation in the earth’s magnetic field (radiation belts, later discovered by Van Allen) to explain the magnetic-storm ring current (1956).]
Wikipedia then tells us that in 1951, “Van Allen was the first to devise a balloon-rocket combination that lifted rockets on balloons high above most of the Earth’s atmosphere before firing them even higher. The rockets were ignited after the balloons reached an altitude of 16 kilometers. (10 miles)
On the 31st January 1958, the Americans launched their answer to ‘Sputnik-1’ being ‘Explorer -1’ from Cape Canaveral in Florida. From data gathered by ‘Explorer-1’ and ‘Explorer-3’ which was launched on the 26th March 1958, Dr. S. Fred Singer’s 1956 theory of the existence of trapped radiation in the earth’s magnetic field was proven, and the radiation belt was named after Van Allen.
By now it was time for the American Congress to act, and in July they did by creating NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) which would come into being on the 1st October 1958. This however did not interfere with the space race.
On the 26th July 1958, ‘Explorer-4’ was launched to study ‘Argus radiation’; “Explorer-5 was launched on the 24th August 1958 but failed to reach orbit. ‘Explorer-6’ was launched on the 7th August 1959 for ‘Magnetosphere studies – radiation belt meteorology.
Back to the Race to the Moon
What we have covered so far in the ‘Race to the Moon’ is this:
Russian Sputnik-1 4th October 1957 First Satellite
Russian Sputnik-2 3rd November 1957 First Animal in Space
American Explorer-1 31st January 1958 USA’s first Satellite
American Explorer-3 26th March 1958 USA Satellite
Russian Sputnik-3 15th May 1958 Scientific Satellite
First man to survive in Space
The first Cosmonauts as previously mentioned did not survive their journey into space. However, the cosmonaut, Vladimir Ilyushin was launched into space on the 7th April 1961 but his spacecraft malfunctioned and crashed in China where he was hospitalised.
On the 12th April 1961, cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin in ‘Vostok-1’ was launched into space and was able to land successfully. Thus Gagarin was proclaimed by the Russians as the ‘first man in space’.
First Spacewalk
Again it is the Russians who beat the Americans in this arena. The first person to walk in space was Alexei Leonov in the spacecraft ‘Voskhod-2’ on the 18th March 1965. Three months later on the 3rd June 1965 the Americans are able to emulate the feat with Ed White in ‘Gemini-4’
First to actually reach the Moon
These are the successful events, and as previously mentioned there were also several failures which included loss of life. The next stage of this race was to actually reach the Moon. Again, the Russians were the first to succeed in this endeavour. On the 12th September 1959 the Russian spacecraft, ‘Luna-2’ impacted on the Moon. Other Luna spacecraft recorded the lack of any magnetic fields on the Moon as well no radiation belts.
The American missions to impact on the Moon though suffered 15 failures until they were successful on the 28th July 1964 with ‘Ranger-7’. Here the Russians were displaying their superiority. I say again; America suffered 15 rocket failures up to July 1964!
What I wish to point out here is that the Russians had always beaten the Americans, despite the Americans reliance on technology. Thus it must be no surprise that the Russians have done it again, and will continue to do so.
Also the Americans dedication to Einstein over the more capable Nicola Tesla demonstrates another major flaw in their mentality.
Andrew, I find your sentence about radiation belt to be quite interesting. I never pursued human space exploration very much, but I did stumble on a piece saying that Radiation belt was the reason why USSR aborted any plans for sending humans to the Moon and decided to send robots instead. Later on it decided to abort any trips to the Moon all together.
@ ” I have a feeling that the main reason for the breakdown of the USSR was that it was forced to compete with the US in the ‘Arms Race’. That cost was too great for the Russians.”
I too entertained such thoughts, but then I realized that the main reason was treason and bribery.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Anyway the treason and bribery continue, but Yeltsin had the last laugh – by bringing in VVP as a redeemer.
The treason seems to have backfired.
Lavrov assures Moscow has information about schemes hatched by the militaries of both the US and other Western countries against Russia
More:
http://tass.com/politics/1015337
Seen on FB
Jon Hellevig
·
Lavrov today announced that Russia is aware of the United States war plans against Russia. – Let that sink in. This is how serious the situation is. Can anybody imagine that five years ago, Russia’s foreign minister could have possibly said anything like that? Lavrov says it to raise global awareness about how dangerous the American regime is pushing the world to the brink of total annihilation. This is also the same reason why Putin demonstrated Russia’s new hyper-sonic nuclear weapons which are a generation ahead of what the Americans can muster.
Russia wants to pierce the Western propaganda wall and push the message home to decision makers but also to the public, of course. I am personally convinced that the Pentagon, CIA and all the 17 sisters dupe even the Congress and the President with fake intelligence reports about Russia’s nuclear deterrence and its willingness to use it. Therefore, Putin from time to time reminds that Russia will strike back. (Or even first if a fight is inevitable). Not, to mentioned how they lied about Russia’s economy, which was supposed to sink with the sanctions.
This is like saying a tic-tac-toe player is aware of his/her opponents strategy. Its not really that hard to figure out. And the strategic plans of the USA are not all that hard to figure out either. They tend to be very straightforward and obvious. They are usually publicly announced in great length.
When was the last time the Americans attacked a country and everyone in the world was surprised on the day of the attack? Usually everyone has known it was coming for months in advance. These people are not subtle and they do not really do a good job nor put much effort into deception.
I think anyone who is paying attention is very aware of the American’s plans. And, if someone doesn’t pay attention for awhile, if for instance they spend a month on summer vacation with their family, then visits to WaPo and CNN will quickly get them caught back up on the latest that the Americans are doing.
“Russia wants to pierce the Western propaganda wall and push the message home to decision makers but also to the public, of course. I am personally convinced that the Pentagon, CIA and all the 17 sisters dupe even the Congress and the President with fake intelligence reports about Russia’s nuclear deterrence and its willingness to use it. Therefore, Putin from time to time reminds that Russia will strike back. (Or even first if a fight is inevitable). Not, to mentioned how they lied about Russia’s economy, which was supposed to sink with the sanctions.”
It was done in the Past on the Soviet Strength. I have no doubt that they are doing it today.
No mention of Europe?
Wasn’t the INF treaty signed because of European concerns re intermediate range nuclear weapons as these weapons were intended for use in Europe?
What do European countries have to say on this topic?
Important note, by my opinion. It is worth of mentioning that at least the Germany, Italy, Turkey, South Korea and Japan have the capability and the economic power to became nuclear very, very soon. And if the US will withdraw from INF treaty, they probably will be considering their own nuclear deterrent. If there is an intention (which Trump already expressed) in the US to share their enormous military costs with more allies (ideally also by purchasing more American weapons), then withdrawal from INF looks like a bargain. it will inevitably increase the tensions between Russia and it’s European and Pacific neighbors,and thus it can cause a serious blowback to Russia’s current success to drag US into costly arm’s race. Because yes, the Russians have presented some pretty technologies to bypass missile defenses, and caused US some headaches with investment to retaliatory means but with INF lift Americans can let their allies to rise to a challenge for them in a field where Russians can hardly respond – the numbers. Russians can be technologically mature but with number of nervous and both economically a scientifically potent players all around their border, it will lose it’s unique status as a military superpower forever. And US too. Maybe US are ready to pay the price, counting on that in the end of the day this is better than the fate of Soviet union.
The nuclear Western threat, constant, beloved to US and Western identity, must and is in process of being destroyed by small and large European countries, not only NATO countries. The natural experiment of human beings cannot otherwise survive. Today a good half of human beings, animal, insect, bird needs have been industrially, corporately, eliminated. The fallout of their loss and of inevitable earth warming from abusing that global reality is in full swing, a deathly march to nothingness. This discussion of the global arms race the US has forced on the globe is a measure in way of discussing and measuring our disintegration versus our survival.
.
Some might possibly realize that INF Treaty is eclipsed when so-called “drones” came into use. What’s is a “drone”?
Well, if one were to use a 747 aircraft, or an old F16…or a purpose built aircraft…
Any modern flying machine with enough fuel and range is already a weapon in violation of INF. For long time “Autopilot” is sophisticated enough that all modern fly machine = weapon.
Is a matter of Treaty Law become irrelevant due to technical change.
INF T needs fixing to accommodate the new reality, which is obvious since “They” did the aircrafts ringer job and coincidental demolitions of WTC 1,2, 7, and Pet-a-gone. Such fixing is not possible with “partners” that are not capable of contract.
A “race” for new flying bomb weapons is dangerous, yes, but better that surprise attack, which is suicidal “alternative”.
…………..
Some of the author’s claims are in fact buttressed by travel notes of R. Heinlein who was in Russian Soviet Republic at time frame late 1950s and wrote that young Soviet soldiers were bragging, in face to face meeting on street, about a manned launch – one that was then hushed-up, as it seems that pilot died and mission failed to achieve goal. Naturally RAH is suspect, as the cryptofascist was USNR engineer (mechanical/electrical, and with his wife, also engineer, and thus understood to be an agent of cia at the time). Heretofore I doubted RAH story. Now I will re-read his notes, which I have somewheres…
LOL, yes, the unabridged version of “Stranger in a strange land” is obviously the work of the CIA and shows CIA thinking throughout.
If I may, the wonderful picture with a bear could have been described as “The damn Russia in on our way to the World Domination”. Well, “Mir” in Russian means Peace as well as World. I like my description better.
The problem with the thesis of this article, is that the U. S. President, according to the U. S. Constitution’s principles of checks and balances, and separation of powers doctrines; puts his signature to legislative bills in order for them to become law. He also has the power to negotiate treaties. Should one expire, and he deems it necessary, he can sign off on another, to his liking. In the end, the American Congress doesn’t have sole authority to make policies. The President is equally involved in their final outcome. All of the actions–again; all of the actions–that the Americans have taken against the Russian Federation, and against President Putin, have had the direct or tacit agreement of the sitting U. S President. There is NOTHING about ‘chump trump’ that differs is this regard.
The Americans are very talented at spouting propaganda, lies, and half-truths to justify their shredding of international agreements like the INF, the ABM Treaty, or the Iranian nuclear deal, but at base, American behavior and true motivations are easy to discern.
As William Blum has stated, US foreign policy is very easy to understand, if you start with the premise that America has a right to rule the world.
Everything else America claims to champion is a con man’s lie whether that be freedom, democracy, human rights, the rule of law, Christianity, traditional values, or LGBTQ rights.
Ending the INF treaty will further allow America to induce an arms race against Russia and China in the hope that the USA can bankrupt those nations (who are the primary obstacles to American unipolar tyranny) similar to what Ronald Reagan did to the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
The Death of the INF Treaty Could Signal a US-Russia Missile Race
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/12/08/death-inf-treaty-could-signal-us-russia-missile-race.html
Iran Deal Abandoned, INF Next. US Steadily Dismantling Arms Control
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/16/iran-deal-abandoned-inf-next-us-steadily-dismantling-arms-control.html
This is an excellent article. Glad it got translated and posted here.
https://www.wnd.com/2000/06/4135/
Russia’s Hidden Nuclear Missiles