Joe Biden just admitted the real reason behind the US anti-China crusade.
Never before has a US president acknowledged that the US may no longer be the world's undisputed superpower.
BT's Kei Pritsker analyzes Biden's admission and what kind of devastating conflict this could lead to.
13 comments:
Captain Obvious is working for Breakthrough News.
If you have both the capacity and ability to blow up the world with nukes, then, as far as I am concerned, you're a superpower. For example, tiny Israel is also a superpower. Does anyone here think that the sole reason for its nukes are its Arab neighbours or Iran? Turkey now has superpower aspirations because it too seeks nuclear weapons. The question is who is going to sell them the nuke technology and everything else that goes with a nuke program. Pakistan?
Btw, we have a nuke program in Canada, too. But don't be alarmed since it is for medical purposes only (not sure anymore for energy purposes).
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/our-natural-resources/energy-sources-distribution/nuclear-energy-uranium/medical-isotopes/23060
Do the French build their nukes to the same standard they build their cars?
lastgreek,
"tiny Israel is also a superpower"
How Hezbollah Defeated Israel - by Alastair Crooke - Mark Perry
“It seemed to them [USAF officers] that Israel threw away the book in Lebanon. This wasn’t surgical, it wasn’t precise, and it certainly wasn’t smart. You can’t just coat a country in iron and hope to win.”
The cold, harsh numbers of the war point up the fallacy of the Israeli air and ground campaign. Hezbollah had secreted upwards of 18,000 rockets in its arsenals prior to the conflict. These sites were hardened against Israeli air strikes and easily survived the air campaign. Hezbollah officials calculated that from the time of firing until the IAF was able to identify and deploy fighters to take out the mobile rockets was 90 seconds. Through years of diligent training, Hezbollah rocket teams had learned to deploy, fire and safely cover their mobile launchers in less than 60 seconds, with the result that IAF planes and helicopters (which Israel has in much fewer numbers than it boasts) could not stop Hezbollah’s continued rocket fire at Israel (“Israel is about three helicopters away from a total disaster,” one US military officer commented).
The robust Hezbollah defense was also taking its toll on Israeli armor. When Israel finally agreed to a ceasefire and began its withdrawal from the border area, it left behind upwards of 40 armored vehicles, nearly all of them destroyed by expertly deployed AT-3 “Sagger” anti-tank missiles–which is the NATO name for the Russian-made vehicle- or man-deployed, wire-guided, second-generation 9M14 Malyutka–or “Little Baby”.
With a range of 3 kilometers, the Sagger proved enormously successful in taking on Israeli tanks, a fact that must have given Israeli armor commanders fits, in large part because the Sagger missile deployed by Hezbollah is an older version (developed and deployed in 1973) of a more modern version that is more easily hidden and deployed and has a larger warhead. If the IDF could not protect its armor against the 1973 “second generation” version, IDF commanders must now be wondering how it can possibly protect itself against a version that is more modern, more sophisticated, and more deadly.
After-battle reports of Hezbollah commanders now confirm that IDF troops never fully secured the border area and Maroun al-Ras was never fully taken. Nor did Hezbollah ever feel the need to call up its reserves, as Israel had done. “The entire war was fought by one Hezbollah brigade of 3,000 troops, and no more,” one military expert in the region said. “The Nasr Brigade fought the entire war. Hezbollah never felt the need to reinforce it.”
Further to my comment,
Why is Israel so anxious to frustrate Hezbollah’s Precision Project? Because once it is achieved, it will elevate Hezbollah’s war-making capability to that of a state military force. Hezbollah will possess all the advantages of an offensive air force without needing to own a single combat aircraft. Its precision missiles will be able to paralyze any vital installation or terrorize any civilian population center in Israel.
One of the biggest advantages of ground-launched rockets and missiles is their small footprint. Precision rockets and missiles enjoy the same advantage: their launchers are as small, stealthy, and hard to find and destroy as those of their more imprecise predecessors. Air power, by contrast, has the Achilles’ Heel of a reliance on huge air bases replete with kilometers-long runways, aircraft hangars, workshops, communication centers, and so on.
The vulnerability of giant, stationary air bases to precision missile strikes was demonstrated during the January 2020 Iranian missile strike on the US-operated Ein Assad air base in Iraq.
In this video, Nasrallah brings out his maps and explains how he could bomb Israel back to the Stone Age. He explains how his rockets and missiles can cover all of Israel but he will focus all his attacks on Haifa and its environs. It's estimated that Hezbollah has around 150,000 rockets and missiles, and can sustain a rate of fire of 1,400 a day into Israel. As an Iranian proxy, Hezbollah holds Israel hostage. An attack against Iran by the US would result in an attack against Israel.
Hassan Nasrallah: We Have Enough Missiles to Send Israel Back to the Stone Age
Yo we could kill everybody there in a couple of days...
AF, notwithstanding Hez.’s bravery, they took a bloody pounding. A couple of more such “victories” and they are wiped off the map.
Btw, feel the same about the Vietnam War.
Matt,
On April 18, 1983, a suicide bomber driving a van devastated the U.S. embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans. Then, on October 23, a Lebanese terrorist drove a truck packed with explosives into the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 U.S. military personnel. That same morning, 58 French soldiers were killed in their barracks two miles away in a separate suicide terrorist attack.
The US and the French hightailed out of there pretty quick.
lastgreek,
From the same article:
Perhaps the most telling sign of Israel’s military failure comes in counting the dead and wounded. Israel now claims that it killed about 400-500 Hezbollah fighters, while its own losses were significantly less. But a more precise accounting shows that Israeli and Hezbollah casualties were nearly even. It is impossible for Shi’ites (and Hezbollah) not to allow an honorable burial for its martyrs, so in this case it is simply a matter of counting funerals. Fewer than 180 funerals have been held for Hezbollah fighters–nearly equal to the number killed on the Israeli side. That number may be revised upward: our most recent information from Lebanon says the number of Shi’ite martyr funerals in the south can now be precisely tabulated at 184.
This from Wikipedia:
Hezbollah armed strength
Hezbollah has the armed strength of a medium-sized army. Hezbollah is generally considered the most powerful non-state actor in the world, and to be stronger than the Lebanese Army. A hybrid force, the group maintains "robust conventional and unconventional military capabilities." The party's fighting strength has grown substantially since the 2006 Lebanon War.
Hezbollah does not reveal its manpower and estimates vary widely. In 2017, Jane's assessed that Hezbollah had more than 25,000 full-time fighters and perhaps 20,000–30,000 reservists. They are financed in part by Iran and trained by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Hezbollah's military budget runs about one billion dollars per year.
This from another Wikipedia article as regards Syria:
Hezbollah deployed several thousand fighters in Syria and has lost up to 1,700 fighters in combat.
re: tanks versus anti-tank missiles
Watch the first couple of minutes.
Israeli Merkava Tank V Hizballah fighters using Russian We
Why is Hezbollah considered a non-state actor when they're in the government?
If Israel wants to annex a piece of Lebanon, they're welcome to try. The US wouldn't support them to that end, though. Destroying Lebanon, yes. Annexation, no.
“The US and the French hightailed out of there pretty quick.“
Yes was a mistake to be there in the first place.., was also Cold War context so things have changed a lot since then...
The problem is we don’t have proper civilian leadership lately they are relying on the professional military in strategic decision making too much...
We should have taken out at least a second city over there in some nation responsible in response to 9-11... maybe Afghanistan... maybe Saudi... would have to look at the intel...
Military will ever recommend deploying a nuclear weapon it’s a civilian weapon... civilians get military to deliver it...
AF, I paraphrased Hez. leaders’ opinion re the last war from an interview given,
Post a Comment