NEW SILK STRATEGIES
  • Home
    • Русский язык
    • Français
    • Deutsch
    • Español
  • Geopolitics
    • International Relations
    • Military Affairs
    • News & Analysis
    • Culture
    • Economics and Finance
  • Language
  • Opinion
  • About
  • Contact

Military affairs.

NATO THINKS IT CAN WHIP RUSSIA. REALLY? TIME TO REIN IT IN.

12/28/2019

2 Comments

 
 Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora.

NATO's latest drills right at the Russian border are a clear-cut provocation and suggest NATO thinks it can successfully invade Russia. I answered 2 questions relating to this issue at Quora.
 
https://www.quora.com/Is-Putin-correct-in-saying-that-the-West-is-trying-to-catch-up-with-Russia-s-deployment-of-a-new-generation-of-strategic-nuclear-weapons/answer/Vince-Dhimos

Q: IS PUTIN CORRECT IN SAYING THAT THE WEST IS TRYING TO CATCH UP WITH RUSSIA’S DEPLOYMENT OF A NEW GENERATION OF STRATEGIC NUCLEAR WEAPONS?
 
Vince Dhimos, Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016-present)

It doesn’t matter what Putin said. It matters what US experts are saying, and it looks like they agree with the Russian president.
 
This is from National Interest, the flagship of the think tank Centre for the National Interest, which deals primarily with US defence issues.
 
Putin Makes a Startling Claim: Russia Is the World's Leader in Hypersonic Weapons
 
QUOTE:
 
“So, where does this leave the United States? In the short term, at a clear strategic disadvantage. Independent experts, including those at the National Defense Strategy Commission (NDSC), have raised concerns that the U.S. military is trailing Russia and China in the development of hypersonic delivery systems. When asked about the U.S. capacity to intercept an Avanguard-launched missile, US Air Force General John E. Hyten, the Commander of US Strategic Command point-blankly told Congress “we don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us.”
 
“Earlier in 2019, the Pentagon awarded a contract to Dynetics Technical Solutions to manufacture a set of hypersonic glide body prototypes. But the fruits of those efforts are several years away, with the first units expected no sooner than 2023.”
 
Vince Dhimos then answered a related question at Quora.
 
https://www.quora.com/Are-the-USs-and-Russias-ICBMs-with-multiple-warheads-capable-of-striking-multiple-cities-hundreds-of-miles-apart-as-shown-in-movies-or-are-the-warheads-separation-limited-by-just-a-few-miles-and-would-need-to-all/answer/Vince-Dhimos
 
Q: ARE THE US’S AND RUSSIA’S ICBMS WITH MULTIPLE WARHEADS CAPABLE OF STRIKING MULTIPLE CITIES HUNDREDS OF MILES APART AS SHOW IN THE MOVIES, OR ARE THE WARHEADS’ SEPARATION LIMITED BY JUST A FEW MILES AND WOULD ALL NEED TO TO HIT THE SAME CITY?
 
Vince Dhimos, Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016-present)
 
The latest information I have is that the US has phased out MIRVs in 2014.
 
Russia not only still has them but is constantly improving them. The latest Russian ICBMs are hypersonic and cannot be intercepted. This was recently confirmed by Gen. John Hyten, commander of US Strategic Command. In other words, Russia has the US in check.
 
Here is what you need or know about the separation of the independant warheads:
 
Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) - Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
 
Warheads on MIRVed missiles can be released from the missile at different speeds and in different directions. Some MIRVed missiles can hit targets as far as 1,500 kilometers apart.
 
So no, independent warheads are not especially limited in distance, and those from the same missile can hit targets far removed from each other.
 
And yet NATO continues to hold drills at the very border of Russia, suggesting it thinks it can take on a country that is in fact superior in strength. Seems like suicide to me. Or more likely just a bluff.

Just another reason why NATO is way out of control and needs to be abolished before it gets us all blown up, as I showed here ​http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news--analysis/eurexit-from-nato-needed.

2 Comments
hedley
12/28/2019 09:14:58 pm

Such stupidity not worth brain room.

Reply
John McClain
12/29/2019 05:27:03 am

So much of our "hierarchy" of leadership, allows for high authority based on scientific based "skill sets", while ignoring the known fact, no one is qualified to lead in war, without having served in war, at least enough to actually be able to name the key issues that cause war to be "abject chaos".
One can hypothesize all day and night, but until one has lived through a bombing campaign, watched people die on the left and right, and continued to fight, a leader isn't capable of making rational decisions that fulfill mission necessities, while maintaining reason, moral principle, and coming out with one's soul intact.
John Bolton is a prime example. He knows how to make things be destroyed, but is utterly incapable of making a moral choice regarding actual "defense", and invasive war for defense of hegemony, a delineated war crime, written by U.S. and U.K. diplomats, but unsigned by any American President or congress.
What one writes as a moral code, on paper, is meaningless, unless it is abided by, precisely, to the very spirit of principle. No General should ever be allowed remain with stars, "knowing there is no plan, no possibility of fulfillment, when it isn't defined" and yet accepts the command. It violates our oath of Service, to our Constitution, not leaders, politics, nor government, but to the "rule of law over government".
No butterbar, second Lieutenant, much less a light Colonel, leading battalions, and certainly not any "staff officer" can ever turn to their oath, in any of our recent invasions, and suggest they "kept their honor". I barely kept "self-respect" teaching my Marines how to hold to their oaths, and never obey an "unlawful order", while having to send them to war, and not allowed to take them, and lead them.
All our ways in forty years have been a "Charlie Foxtrot" in every way, no excuses, completely willfully, and simply done "anyway". Generals answer to bankers, and expect to find a home among them, when they are done with their term of "mayhem". We've needed a "General Smedley Darlington Butler" ever since he retired after the war, having thrown down the coup, assembled by our generals, of all services, and admirals, to kill FDR. "War is a Racket" is required reading for Marines of all ranks, but somehow, we are supposed to read it, without absorbing any real meaning. This is the state of "American culture" today.
Semper Fidelis,
John McClain
GySgt, USMC, ret.
Vanceboro, NC, USA

Reply



Leave a Reply.

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
    • Русский язык
    • Français
    • Deutsch
    • Español
  • Geopolitics
    • International Relations
    • Military Affairs
    • News & Analysis
    • Culture
    • Economics and Finance
  • Language
  • Opinion
  • About
  • Contact