Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Edward Lozansky — How to avoid WWIII while celebrating the victory in WWII

Edward Lozansky talks some sense. Washington is not listening.
Speaking about paranoia one would probably should be more afraid of a volcano eruption on the Neptune planet because whatever you think of Putin he is not a madman to start a war with NATO. He is well aware that the Northern alliance is a lot more powerful economically and militarily and in case of nuclear war there will be a total annihilation of the civilization as we know it.…
I would add China to that. And approaching Russia and China's borders (read "red lines") is even more reckless and irresponsible. It's imperial hubris.

The Washington Times — Analysis/Opinion
How to avoid WWIII while celebrating the victory in WWII
Edward Lozansky | President of the American University in Moscow

See also
Hybrid War, a Beltway concept, has even been turned upside down by the conceptualizers. NATO, affecting puzzlement at the very existence of the concept, interprets the Russian “invasion” of Ukraine as Hybrid War. That serves prime Hybrid War purveyors such as the RAND corporation to take it further, peddling war game scenarios of Russia being able to invade and conquer the Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania — in less than 60 hours.…

This is the ultimate, ongoing 21st confrontation that will keep generating multiple, localized hybrid warfare forms – as it takes place not only across Eurasia but across the whole Global South. It’s all interlocked – from Maidan to the secret TTIP negotiations; from provoking China in the South China Sea to an oil price war and an attack on the ruble; from the NSA spying on Petrobras feeding a slow motion, legalistic regime change process in Brazil to an EU ravaged by twin plagues; a refugee crisis ultimately provoked by NATO’s wars (and instrumentalized by Turkey) coupled with Salafi-jhadi terrorism also spawned by the same wars.…

The New Normal: Cold War 2.0Pepe Escobar
All of the Pentagon’s investments are limited to offensive weapons designed to execute the invasions of other countries. For example, who needs stealth aircraft to defend their territory? Washington is the only owner of nuclear aircraft carriers escorted by dozens of cruisers, destroyers, amphibious assault ships, and nuclear attack submarines capable of attacking any point on the globe. The US also wields a huge fleet of over 500 heavy cargo planes specifically designed to carry armored divisions tens of thousands of kilometers away from the American continent. Russia, surrounded by NATO military bases, is seen by Washington as a huge booty given its huge territory on which 60% of the Earth’s mineral resources, drinking water, land suitable for agriculture, and forests are located.
After the collapse of the USSR, when the United States was left as the only superpower in the world, the cliché was established whereby Washington proposes a military invasion of another country. First it creates a psychosis among public opinion that the given country is on the verge of attacking and occupying its neighbors. When in fact the US military is invading the target country, this process of psychological warfare conducted intensively by subservient media presents US military aggression as eliminating the threat of the neighbors’ target state. As for the US, in reality the "cold war” never ended, and over the past two years has triggered a psychological war against Russia and managed to oblige the EU and other vassal states to impose economic sanctions.
Hybrid warfare is already underway, with information war and economic war, along with NATO buildup and advance toward Russia's borders intent on testing Russia's red lines.

The military analysis is detailed. Not Star Wars yet, other than satellite information systems, but impressive gear both sides have assembled that goes far beyond previous conventional warfare, and nuclear warfare is taking a hypersonic twist.
Any military invasion of Russia could be executed successfully by USA only before 2018, after which the chances of success drop dramatically given the Pentagon’s loss of technological superiority in many fields compared to the Russian Army and the possibility of the conflict turning into a global one involving the use of nuclear weapons.
Nato’s Future Blitzkrieg Against Russia: The Battle For Air Supremacy
Valentin Vasilescu 
The author is a Romanian military analyst, former deputy commander of Otopeni Airport (Romania). Translated by Katehon.com from Romanian

Alexander Dugin

No comments: