Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia  (Read 1169 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 22945
  • Reputation: +20086/-243
  • Gender: Male
How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
« on: June 13, 2014, 01:35:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • By Eric Zuesse:
    On Wednesday, June 11th, CNN headlined “U.S. Sends B-2 Stealth Bombers to Europe,” and reported that “they arrived in Europe this week for training.” Wikipedia notes that B-2s were “originally designed primarily as a nuclear bomber,” and that “The B-2 is the only aircraft that can carry large air-to-surface standoff weapons in a stealth configuration.”
    In other words, the primary advantage of the newer, “Stealth,” version of B-2, is its first-strike (or surprise-attack) nuclear capability. That’s the upgrade: the weapon’s ability to sneak upon the target-country and destroy it before it has a chance to fire off any of its own nuclear weapons in response to that “first-strike” attack. The advantage of Stealth is creating and stationing a nuclear arsenal for the purpose of winning a nuclear war, instead of for the goal of having continued peace via “Mutually Assured Destruction,” or MAD.
    Some historical background is necessary here, so that a reader can understand why this is happening — the switch to an objective of actually winning a nuclear war (as opposed to deterring one). One cannot understand what’s happening now in Ukraine without knowing this bigger picture.
    (This account is written under the assumption that the reader already knows some of the allegations it contains, but not all of them, and that the reader will click on the link wherever a given allegation requires documentation and support.)
    I have previously reported about “How and Why the U.S. Has Re-Started the Cold War (The Backstory that Precipitated Ukraine’s Civil War),” and, “Do We Really Need to Re-Start the Cold War?” I pointed out there that we don’t really need to re-start the Cold War, at all, since communism (against which the Cold War was, at least allegedly, fought) clearly lost to capitalism (we actually won the Cold War, and peacefully) but that America’s aristocracy very much does need to re-start a war with Russia — and why it does. (It has to do with maintaining the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, something that benefits America’s aristocrats enormously.)
    Consequently, for example, a recent CNN Poll has found that Americans’ fear of Russia has soared within just the past two years. Our news media present a type of news “reporting” that places Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, into a very bad light, even when it’s unjustified by the facts.
    The situation now is thus rather similar to that right before World War I, when the aristocracy in America decided that a pretext had to be created for our going to war against Germany. That War had already started in Europe on 28 July 1914, and President Wilson wanted to keep the U.S. out of it, but we ultimately joined it on the side of J.P. Morgan and Company. This was documented in detail in an important 1985 book, Britain, America and the Sinews of War, 1914-1918, which was well summarized in Business History Review, by noting that: “J.P. Morgan & Co. served as Britain’s financial and purchasing agent, and the author makes especially good use of the Morgan Grenfell & Co. papers in London to probe that relationship. Expanding British demand for U.S. dollars to pay for North American imports made the politics of foreign exchange absolutely central to Anglo-American relations. How to manage those politics became the chief preoccupation of Her Majesty’s representatives in the United States,” and most especially of Britain’s financial and purchasing agent in the U.S.
    In 1917, after almost two years of heavy anti-German propaganda in the U.S. press that built an overwhelming public support for our joining that war against Germany, Congress found that, in March 1915, “J.P. Morgan interests had bought 25 of America’s leading newspapers, and inserted their own editors, in order to control the media” so that we’d join the war on England’s side. Whereas back then, it was Germany’s leader who was being goaded into providing a pretext for us to declare war against his country, this time it’s Russia’s leader (Putin) who is being demonized and goaded into providing such a pretext, though Putin (unlike Germany’s Kaiser) has thus far refrained from providing the pretext that Obama constantly warns us that he will (a Russian invasion of Ukraine). Consequently, Obama’s people are stepping up the pressure upon Putin by bombing the areas of neighboring Ukraine where Russian speakers live, who have family across the border inside Russia itself. Just a few more weeks of this, and Putin’s public support inside Russia could palpably erode if Putin simply lets the slaughter proceed without his sending troops in to defend them and to fight back against Kiev’s (Washington’s surrogate’s) bombing-campaign. This would provide the pretext that Obama has been warning about.
    I also have reported on “Why Ukraine’s Civil War Is of Global Historical Importance.” The article argued that “This civil war is of massive historical importance, because it re-starts the global Cold War, this time no longer under the fig-leaf rationalization of an ideological battle between ‘capitalism’ versus ‘communism,’ but instead more raw, as a struggle between, on the one hand, the U.S. and West European aristocracies; and, on the other hand, the newly emerging aristocracies of Russia and of China.” The conflict’s origin, as recounted there, was told in its highest detail in an article in the scholarly journal Diplomatic History, about how U.S. President George H.W. Bush in 1990 fooled the Soviet Union’s leader Mikhail Gorbachev into Gorbachev’s allowing the Cold War to be ended without any assurance being given to the remaining rump country, his own Russia, that NATO and its missiles and bombers won’t expand right up to Russia’s doorstep and surround Russia with a first-strike ability to destroy Russia before Russia will even have a chance to get its own nuclear weapons into the air in order to destroy the U.S. right back in retaliation.
    That old system — “Mutually Assured Destruction” or MAD, but actually very rational from the public’s perspective on both sides — is gone. The U.S. increasingly is getting nuclear primacy. Russia, surrounded by NATO nations and U.S. nuclear weapons, would be able to be wiped out before its rusty and comparatively puny military force could be mustered to respond. Whereas we are not surrounded by their weapons, they are surrounded by ours. Whereas they don’t have the ability to wipe us out before we can respond, we have the ability to wipe them out before they’ll be able to respond. This is the reason why America’s aristocracy argue that MAD is dead. An article, “Environmental Consequences of Nuclear War” was published in the December 2008 Physics Today, and it concluded that, “the indirect effects ['nuclear winter'] would likely eliminate the majority of the human population.” (It would be even worse, and far faster, than the expected harms from global warming.) However, aristocrats separate themselves from the public, and so their perspective is not necessarily the same as the public’s. The perspective that J.P. Morgan and Co. had in 1915 wasn’t the perspective that the U.S. public had back then, and it also wasn’t the perspective that our President, Woodrow Wilson, did back then, when we were a democracy. But it’s even less clear today that we are a democracy than it was in 1915. In that regard, things have only gotten worse in America.
    So, President Obama is now trying to persuade EU leaders to join with him to complete this plan to replace MAD with a first-strike nuclear capability that will eliminate Russia altogether from the world stage.
    As I also documented, the IMF is thoroughly supportive of this plan to remove Russia, and announced on May 1st, just a day prior to our massacre of independence-supporters in the south Ukrainian city of Odessa on May 2nd, that unless all of the independence supporters in south and eastern Ukraine can be defeated and/or killed, the IMF will pull the plug on Ukraine and force it into receivership.
    Obama clearly means business here, and so the government that we have installed in Kiev is bombing throughout southeastern Ukraine, in order to convince the residents there that resistance will be futile. Part of the short-term goal here is to get Russia to absorb the losses of all of Ukraine’s unpaid debts to Russia, so that far less of Ukraine’s unpaid debts to the IMF, U.S. and E.U., will remain unpaid. It’s basically an international bankruptcy proceeding, but without an international bankruptcy court, using instead military means. It’s like creditors going to a bankrupt for repayment, and the one with the most gunmen gets paid, while the others do not. This is the reason why the IMF ordered the leaders in Kiev to put down the rebellion in Ukraine’s southeast. What’s important to the IMF is not land, it’s the Kiev government’s continued control over the assets in the rebelling part of Ukraine — assets that will be worth something in a privatization or sell-off to repay that debt. However, for Obama, what is even more important than repaid debts is the continued dominance of the U.S. dollar. Wall Street needs that.
    Among other indications that the U.S. is now preparing a nuclear attack against Russia is an article on May 23rd, “U.S. Tests Advanced Missile For NATO Interceptor System,” and also a June 10th report from a website with good sources in Russian intelligence, which alleges that Ukrainian President Petro “Poroshenko secretly met with … [an] American delegation headed by the Director of … the CIA’s National Clandestine Service, Frank Archibald, which also included former CIA chief in Ukraine Jeffrey Egan, the current – Raymond Mark Davidson, Mark Buggy (CIA, Istanbul), Andrzej Derlatka, a CIA agent in the Polish intelligence Agency, and member of CIA Kevin Duffin who is working as senior Vice President of the insurance company Brower. Poroshenko and Archibald signed a paper entitled an ‘Agreement on Military Cooperation between the U.S. and Ukraine’”
    Furthermore, barely a month before the CIA and State Department overthrew the previous, the pro-Russian, President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, the government of Netherlands decided, after 18 years of “dithering,” to allow the U.S. to arm our F-35 bombers there with nuclear weapons. And this was already after Holland’s “Parliament in November signed off on a government plan to purchase 37 F-35As to replace the Dutch air force’s aging fleet of nuclear-capable F-16s. The Netherlands is widely understood to host about two dozen U.S. B-61 gravity bombs at the Volkel air base, as part of NATO’s policy of nuclear burden-sharing.”
    Moreover, Obama isn’t only beefing up our first-strike nuclear capability, but is also building something new, called “Prompt Global Strike,” to supplement that nuclear force, by means of “a precision conventional weapon strike” that, if launched against Russia from next-door Ukraine, could wipe out Russia’s nuclear weapons within just a minute or so. That might be a fallback position, for Obama, in case the EU’s leaders (other than Netherlands and perhaps one or two others) might happen to decide that they won’t participate in our planned nuclear invasion of Russia.
    Certainly, Obama means business here, but the big question is whether he’ll be able to get the leaders of other “democratic” nations to go along with his first-strike plan.
    The two likeliest things that can stop him, at this stage, would be either NATO’s breaking up, or else Putin’s deciding to take a political beating among his own public for simply not responding to our increasing provocations. Perhaps Putin will decide that a temporary embarrassment for him at home (for being “wimpy”) will be better, even for just himself, than the annihilation of his entire country would be. And maybe, if Obama pushes his indubitable Superpower card too hard, he’ll be even more embarrassed by this conflict than Putin will be. After all, things like this and this aren’t going to burnish Obama’s reputation in the history books, if he cares about that. But maybe he’s satisfied to be considered to have been George W. Bush II, just a far better-spoken version: a more charming liar than the original. However, if things come to a nuclear invasion, even a U.S. “victory” won’t do much more for Obama’s reputation than Bush’s “victory” in Iraq did for his. In fact, perhaps Americans will then come to feel that George W. Bush wasn’t America’s worst President, after all. Maybe the second half of the Bush-Obama Presidency will be even worse than the first.
    ———-
    Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline snowball

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 328
    • Reputation: +90/-122
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #1 on: June 13, 2014, 06:03:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Take a look at the author of this article's book.
    http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13518825-christ-s-ventriloquists

    Does this sound like someone you should be reading articles by ?

    No. Obviously, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

     :geezer:


    Offline ihsv

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 680
    • Reputation: +914/-116
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #2 on: June 13, 2014, 06:11:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just because the author is a dumb-bell in one area, doesn't mean he doesn't have valuable information to share in another.  Focus on the message and not the messenger.

    I would recommend reading Nuclear War Survival Skills and plan accordingly.

    Also, this site has some great info.
    Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. - Nicene Creed

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5958
    • Reputation: +2113/-47
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #3 on: June 14, 2014, 12:21:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What is forgotten is all the Russian Submarines off the U.S. Coasts
    equipped with the most sophisticated nuclear missiles that are
    just minutes away from any potential targets.   These modern
    submarines run so quiet and cannot be picked up by our modern
    sonar and detection equipment.
    Any first strike on Russia would be absolutely suicide for any
    country that starts this conflict.
    Say no to wars, and stay in Sanctifying Grace. Every day we
    make it through is a gift from God.

    Offline Croix de Fer

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3219
    • Reputation: +2306/-2192
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #4 on: June 14, 2014, 09:55:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If there is an all-out nuclear exchange between the U.S. and Russia, then human life will cease to exist on earth. Let me put this in perspective for everyone:
    Quote
    The Tsar Bomba was a three-stage Teller–Ulam design Lithium bomb with a yield of 50 to 58 megatons of TNT (210 to 240 PJ). This is equivalent to about 1,350–1,570 times the combined power of the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
    LINK

    Now, that bomb was developed and tested by (former) Soviet Union in 1961, and it's a dinosaur compared to the sophisticated U.S. & Russian nukes of today which can probably effect far greater destruction.

    However, the Global Chess Players in their false opposition to each other could still effect a controlled nuclear exchange between nations as to effect a reduction in global population and the final stages of the N(J)ew World Order. I still have to wonder if the events occurring in Ukraine are an orchestrated theater to deceive the herd into believing there are "diametrically opposed nations" risking WWIII and a nuclear exchange.

    WWI and WWII are examples of such mass manipulation and deception. Partly, the objective of these wars was to effect mostly, but not exclusively, white, Christian, European nations fighting and killing each other in order to weaken and reduce Christendom, and debase the family unit through husbands, brothers and sons being killed in the wars, and survivors coming back with PTSD. The men who came back from those wars were not the same as when they entered it. The Korean and Vietnam Wars were also meant to destabilize the family unit through men coming back with addictions and PTSD.
    Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. ~ Psalms 143:1 (Douay-Rheims)


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22945
    • Reputation: +20086/-243
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #5 on: June 14, 2014, 10:43:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: ascent
    If there is an all-out nuclear exchange between the U.S. and Russia, then human life will cease to exist on earth. Let me put this in perspective for everyone:
    Quote
    The Tsar Bomba was a three-stage Teller–Ulam design Lithium bomb with a yield of 50 to 58 megatons of TNT (210 to 240 PJ). This is equivalent to about 1,350–1,570 times the combined power of the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
    LINK

    Now, that bomb was developed and tested by (former) Soviet Union in 1961, and it's a dinosaur compared to the sophisticated U.S. & Russian nukes of today which can probably effect far greater destruction.


    I agree with much of your post (about de-stabilizing the family, the evil purpose of wars against Christendom, etc.) but this part here I don't agree with.

    Bombs don't necessarily double in power every 18 months. There is not a Moore's Law for atomic bombs. They don't just get more and more powerful every year or something. Atomic bombs are not computer processors.

    On the contrary, what I've read is that the Soviet Union and the USA are now more into "strategic" nukes and lower yields, for various reasons. The nuclear strategies of the two countries in 1960 and 2000 are not the same.

    For one thing, the smaller nukes are more useful -- you actually could use one (theoretically) without automatically igniting WW3, destroying an entire country, etc.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22945
    • Reputation: +20086/-243
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #6 on: June 14, 2014, 10:47:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: ihsv
    Just because the author is a dumb-bell in one area, doesn't mean he doesn't have valuable information to share in another.  Focus on the message and not the messenger.

    I would recommend reading Nuclear War Survival Skills and plan accordingly.

    Also, this site has some great info.


    I agree.

    To the person you're responding to (above):
    It's up to you -- you can dismiss whomever.

    But I caution you -- if you want to be consistent, you can only believe anything that comes from the mouth of a Traditional Catholic. Don't dismiss this important article and then blindly believe CNN. Spiritually speaking, they are just as destitute!

    As I've said a million times (and +W taught me this concept):
    If we limit our reading and our bookshelves to books written by SSPX Traditional Catholics (or CMRI Traditional Catholics, if that's your cup of tea) then you will not be reading much, and will have a VERY small library!

    That's why +W invited all sorts of people to the Seminary over the years -- each of them was charged to speak on a very specific topic, on which they had a high degree competence. We weren't encouraged or asked to join any of their fan clubs.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline ihsv

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 680
    • Reputation: +914/-116
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #7 on: June 16, 2014, 09:57:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The reason for high-yield weapons was to compensate for the inherent inaccuracy of first generation ICBMs and gravity bombs.  The first ICBMs could easily miss their targets by a few miles, and so the largest ICBM deliverable weapon of the soviet union was nearly 20 Megatons, large enough to make sure they hit what they were aiming at.  With advancements in precision, The US's largest ICBM weapon is 375 Kiloton, while the Russian SS-18 carries a unitary warhead of 800 KT.  As accuracy increases, the need for monster bombs decrease.

    The Tsar Bomba, a 100MT device that was scaled down to 50MT for the test, was so large it was impractical and never put into service.  It was meant as a show of force.
    Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. - Nicene Creed


    Offline ihsv

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 680
    • Reputation: +914/-116
    • Gender: Male
    How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia
    « Reply #8 on: June 16, 2014, 10:03:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And contrary to poplar belief, a nuclear war, even a full exchange, is survivable, provided certain precautions and preparations are made.  If you don't live in or near a strategic target, likely the greatest threat you would face (aside from the hordes of zombies) would be from radioactive (gamma radiation) fallout.  Protecting yourself is relatively easy, and the decay rate of the radiation is fairly rapid.  
    Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. - Nicene Creed

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16